Neil Bissett v State of New South Wales [2017] NSWDC 12

Neil Bissett v State of New South Wales [2017] NSWDC 12

The court exercised its discretion to grant an extension of time under s 151D(2) Workers Compensation Act 1987 because the explanation for delay was adequate, most delay being attributable to the conduct of the plaintiff's solicitors and some to the defendant; there was no significant prejudice to the defendant, and a fair trial remained possible. Therefore, it was fair and just to grant leave nunc pro tunc for the proceedings to be commenced.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
09 February 2017
Procedural Posture
Civil / Application for Extension of Time to Commence Proceedings (notice of Motion)
Outcome
Leave granted nunc pro tunc for the plaintiff to commence proceedings; each party to bear own costs of the application.
Legal Topics
['extension of Time' 'limitation Periods' 'work Injury Damages' 'discretion Under S 151 D Workers Compensation Act 1987']
['workers Compensation' 'civil Procedure'] ['extension of Time' 'limitation Periods' 'work Injury Damages' 'discretion Under S 151 D Workers Compensation Act 1987']

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 / Application for Extension of Time to Commence Proceedings (notice of Motion)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether leave should be granted to extend time for the plaintiff to commence court proceedings for work injury damages under s 151D Workers Compensation Act 1987' 'Whether the plaintiff provided an adequate explanation for the delay in bringing the proceedings' "Whether presumptive prejudice bars the exercise of the court's discretion"]

Ratio Decidendi

The court exercised its discretion to grant an extension of time under s 151D(2) Workers Compensation Act 1987 because the explanation for delay was adequate, most delay being attributable to the conduct of the plaintiff's solicitors and some to the defendant; there was no significant prejudice to the defendant, and a fair trial remained possible. Therefore, it was fair and just to grant leave nunc pro tunc for the proceedings to be commenced.

Court Disposition

Leave granted nunc pro tunc for the plaintiff to commence proceedings; each party to bear own costs of the application.

Orders

  • ['Leave, nunc pro tunc, pursuant to s 151D(2) of the Workers Compensation Act 1987, granted for the plaintiff to commence proceedings by filing Statement of Claim on 14 July 2016.' 'Each party to pay his or its own costs of the application.']