AUSTRALIAN IRON and STEEL PTY LIMITED v CIRAUDO [1991] NSWCA 9

AUSTRALIAN IRON and STEEL PTY LIMITED v CIRAUDO [1991] NSWCA 9

It was an error of law to treat the receipt of a solicitor's letter proposing action as a material fact of a decisive character under s58 Limitation Act; the letter did not communicate any new material fact within the meaning of the statute and the order for extension of time must be set aside.

Parties
Claimant: Australian Iron and Steel Pty Limited; First Opponent: Palmo Ciraudo; Second Opponent: Second Opponent
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
03 July 1991
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (summons for Order in the Nature of Certiorari) / Appeal From District Court (application for Extension of Time Under Limitation Act)
Outcome
Appeal allowed; orders of District Court set aside; matter remitted to District Court
Legal Topics
Extension of Limitation Period, Error of Law on the Face of the Record, Personal Injuries—industrial Deafness, Judicial Reasons—adequacy of Reasons
Limitation of Actions Personal Injury Industrial Law Extension of Limitation Period Error of Law on the Face of the Record Personal Injuries—industrial Deafness Judicial Reasons—adequacy of Reasons

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 3 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Australian Iron and Steel Pty Limited

Claimant

Palmo Ciraudo

First Opponent

Second Opponent

Second Opponent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review (summons for Order in the Nature of Certiorari) / Appeal From District Court (application for Extension of Time Under Limitation Act)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the District Court judge erred in law in granting an extension of time under s58 Limitation Act 1969 based on a solicitor's letter as a 'material fact' of a decisive character
  2. 2 Whether the reasons for decision disclosed error of law or were adequate

Ratio Decidendi

It was an error of law to treat the receipt of a solicitor's letter proposing action as a material fact of a decisive character under s58 Limitation Act; the letter did not communicate any new material fact within the meaning of the statute and the order for extension of time must be set aside.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; orders of District Court set aside; matter remitted to District Court

Orders

  • Call up the record of the District Court in proceedings number 413 of 1984
  • The orders made by Judge Gallen on 3 September 1990 be quashed