(Re Mauler) Amaca Pty Limited v CSR Limited [2009] NSWDDT 26

(Re Mauler) Amaca Pty Limited v CSR Limited [2009] NSWDDT 26

The Tribunal was not persuaded that its previous rulings concerning the operation of the Dust Diseases Tribunal Regulation 2007 were wrong. In accordance with reg 52(1) and the apportionment determination, Amaca was entitled to judgment against CSR for 39.5 per cent of the plaintiff's damages, with interest.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
26 October 2009
Procedural Posture
Cross Claim for Contribution in Dust Diseases Tribunal Proceedings / Application for Entry of Judgment Against the Cross Defendant Following a Contributions Assessor's Determination as to Apportionment and Settlement of the Plaintiff's Claim
Outcome
Judgment entered for Amaca against CSR; costs ordered against CSR; stay declined.
Legal Topics
['claims Resolution Process' 'dust Diseases Tribunal Regulation 2007' 'contributions Assessor Determination' 'judgment on Apportionment' 'stay of Judgment']
['dust Diseases' 'civil Procedure' 'contribution and Apportionment'] ['claims Resolution Process' 'dust Diseases Tribunal Regulation 2007' 'contributions Assessor Determination' 'judgment on Apportionment' 'stay of Judgment']

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

Cross Claim for Contribution in Dust Diseases Tribunal Proceedings / Application for Entry of Judgment Against the Cross Defendant Following a Contributions Assessor's Determination as to Apportionment and Settlement of the Plaintiff's Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether reg 52(1) of the Dust Diseases Tribunal Regulation 2007 enables a cross claimant to obtain judgment against a cross defendant in accordance with a determination as to apportionment.' 'Whether the previous rulings of the Tribunal concerning the operation of the Regulation were wrong.' "Whether a stay of judgment should be ordered pending CSR's stated intention to appeal."]

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal was not persuaded that its previous rulings concerning the operation of the Dust Diseases Tribunal Regulation 2007 were wrong. In accordance with reg 52(1) and the apportionment determination, Amaca was entitled to judgment against CSR for 39.5 per cent of the plaintiff's damages, with interest.

Court Disposition

Judgment entered for Amaca against CSR; costs ordered against CSR; stay declined.

Orders

  • ['Judgment against CSR in the sum of $229,100 together with interest on that sum calculated in accordance with the Civil Procedure Act 2005.' 'The parties should prepare short minutes of order.' 'CSR is to pay the costs of Amaca.' 'The application for a stay of the judgment is declined.']