What happens if a motion is dealt with in a party's absence, according to the rules?

In the context of New South Wales civil procedure, if a motion is heard in the absence of a party, the rules establish that a representative should be present on their behalf to ensure that the party is adequately represented and their interests are considered. This is significant because it maintains the fairness of the legal process, allowing the court to receive arguments or evidence that the absent party might want to present through their representative.

Having a representative ensures that the absent party's views are still taken into account, and it allows for a more comprehensive understanding of the issues at hand. This practice emphasizes the importance of advocacy and representation in legal proceedings, ensuring that parties are not disadvantaged just because they are unable to attend in person.

The other options do not align with the established procedural guidelines. For example, direct communication with the absent party (as suggested in another choice) might be relevant but does not fully capture the requirement of representation. Furthermore, contesting the decision later or automatically waiving rights does not accurately reflect the procedure in these circumstances, where representation is meant to preserve the party's ability to engage in the process despite their absence.