(Re Verschuren) Amaca Pty Ltd v M & S Whelan Investments Pty Ltd [2010] NSWDDT 2

The judgment should be stayed as there are triable issues of fact, but not set aside, and Whelan must pay costs due to its failure to comply with the Regulation.

Jurisdiction: Australia
Judgment Date: 16 February 2010
Procedural Posture: Cross Claim / Application to Set Aside or Stay Judgment
Outcome: Judgment stayed; not set aside. Costs awarded on indemnity basis.
Legal Topics: ['dust Diseases' 'contribution Determination' 'judgment Stay' 'indemnity Costs']

['tort' 'civil Procedure'] ['dust Diseases' 'contribution Determination' 'judgment Stay' 'indemnity 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

Procedural Posture

Cross Claim / Application to Set Aside or Stay Judgment

Legal Issues

1 ['Whether judgment entered on cross-claim should be set aside or stayed' "Whether the cross-defendant's failure to comply with the Regulation justifies costs order" 'Whether triable issues of fact exist regarding exposure to asbestos']

Ratio Decidendi

The judgment should be stayed as there are triable issues of fact, but not set aside, and Whelan must pay costs due to its failure to comply with the Regulation.

Court Disposition

Judgment stayed; not set aside. Costs awarded on indemnity basis.

Orders

['Proceedings on the judgment of 14 December 2009 are stayed until further order of the Court upon terms that the cross-defendant within 28 days pay into Court the sum of $96,600.' "The cross-defendant will pay the cross-claimant's costs of and incidental to this application on an indemnity basis." 'Part of the...