Topalovic v BlueScope Steel (AIS) Pty Ltd [2024] NSWDDT 7

Topalovic v BlueScope Steel (AIS) Pty Ltd [2024] NSWDDT 7

The plaintiff failed to comply with the Claims Resolution Process by not providing reasonably requested particulars as soon as practicable, causing substantial prejudice to BlueScope's ability to understand and test the plaintiff's claim. The plaintiff also conducted himself as if there was an agreement to attend the medical examination, then refused shortly before the appointment without evidence of deterioration or inability to attend, and BlueScope would suffer significant prejudice if precluded from obtaining its medical examination. Those failures justified removal of the proceedings from the Claims Resolution Process under cl 20(1)(c) of the Dust Diseases Tribunal Regulation 2019.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 June 2024
Procedural Posture
Dust Diseases Claim Concerning Asbestos Related Pleural Disease and Asbestosis / Notice of Motion by the Defendant to Remove the Proceedings From the Claims Resolution Process
Outcome
Proceedings removed from the Claims Resolution Process; plaintiff ordered to pay specified costs, with liberty to seek a different costs order.
Legal Topics
['claims Resolution Process' 'failure to Provide Particulars' 'medical Examination' 'removal From Claims Resolution Process' 'costs']
['dust Diseases' 'civil Procedure'] ['claims Resolution Process' 'failure to Provide Particulars' 'medical Examination' 'removal From Claims Resolution Process' 'costs']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Dust Diseases Claim Concerning Asbestos Related Pleural Disease and Asbestosis / Notice of Motion by the Defendant to Remove the Proceedings From the Claims Resolution Process

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the plaintiff failed to comply with a requirement of the Claims Resolution Process by not responding to particulars sought by the defendant on 26 February 2024.' "Whether the plaintiff's refusal to attend the medico-legal appointment with Professor McKenzie amounted to a failure relevant to removal from the Claims Resolution Process." 'Whether any failure resulted in substantial prejudice to BlueScope or substantial delay for the purposes of cl 20(1)(c) of the Dust Diseases Tribunal Regulation 2019.']

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff failed to comply with the Claims Resolution Process by not providing reasonably requested particulars as soon as practicable, causing substantial prejudice to BlueScope's ability to understand and test the plaintiff's claim. The plaintiff also conducted himself as if there was an agreement to attend the medical examination, then refused shortly before the appointment without evidence of deterioration or inability to attend, and BlueScope would suffer significant prejudice if precluded from obtaining its medical examination. Those failures justified removal of the proceedings from the Claims Resolution Process under cl 20(1)(c) of the Dust Diseases Tribunal Regulation 2019.

Court Disposition

Proceedings removed from the Claims Resolution Process; plaintiff ordered to pay specified costs, with liberty to seek a different costs order.

Orders

  • ['Pursuant to cl 20(1)(c) of the Dust Diseases Tribunal Regulation 2019, the proceedings are removed from the Claims Resolution Process.' 'The Court will hear from the parties as to the appropriate directions to be made to bring the matter to mediation as soon as practicable.' 'The plaintiff is to pay the costs of...