Jay v Petrikas [2019] NSWDC 707

Jay v Petrikas [2019] NSWDC 707

The plaintiffs proved it was not reasonable to commence proceedings for defamation against Ms Hodges prior to 6 September 2017. However, their unexplained delay in seeking preliminary discovery after the limitation period, coupled with their failure to act proactively despite being aware of the claim's elements and available procedures, meant the court exercised its discretion to refuse further extension. Their application for additional time was therefore dismissed.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
28 November 2019
Procedural Posture
Civil / Procedural and Other Rulings
Outcome
Application for extension of limitation period dismissed; amendment irregularity cured; costs reserved.
Legal Topics
['extension of Limitation Period' 'amendment of Statement of Claim' 'irregularity Correction' 'preliminary Discovery']
['defamation' 'civil Procedure'] ['extension of Limitation Period' 'amendment of Statement of Claim' 'irregularity Correction' 'preliminary Discovery']

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

Civil / Procedural and Other Rulings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether order should be made concerning the irregularity created by rejection of the amended pleading under s 63(2) or s 16 of the Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW)' 'Whether an extension under s 56A Limitation Act 1969 should be granted']

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiffs proved it was not reasonable to commence proceedings for defamation against Ms Hodges prior to 6 September 2017. However, their unexplained delay in seeking preliminary discovery after the limitation period, coupled with their failure to act proactively despite being aware of the claim's elements and available procedures, meant the court exercised its discretion to refuse further extension. Their application for additional time was therefore dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application for extension of limitation period dismissed; amendment irregularity cured; costs reserved.

Orders

  • ['An order granting leave to the plaintiffs to amend the motion filed 6 September 2019.' 'An order pursuant to s 63(2) of the Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW) that the Amended Statement of Claim lodged for filing on 30 August 2019 be treated as having been duly filed by the District Court Registry at Sydney on that...