Dwyer v SAS Trustee Corporation [2015] NSWDC 51

Plea 7 is struck out with leave to re-plead; medical examinations by neuropsychologist or cardiologist are unnecessary given admitted supervening conditions; examination by general physician permitted. Plea 6 allowed due to risk of estoppel and to match scope of plaintiff's allegations.

Jurisdiction: Australia
Judgment Date: 03 February 2015
Procedural Posture: Motion / Interlocutory Decision on Pleadings and Medical Examination
Outcome: Motion allowed in part
Legal Topics: ['police Superannuation' 'pleadings' 'causation' 'medical Examination' "meaning of 'commensurate'" 'procedural Ruling']

['workers Compensation' 'superannuation'] ['police Superannuation' 'pleadings' 'causation' 'medical Examination' "meaning of 'commensurate'" 'procedural Ruling']

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

Motion / Interlocutory Decision on Pleadings and Medical Examination

Legal Issues

1 ["Whether pleas 6 and 7 in defendant's amended defence should be struck out" 'Whether plaintiff is required to submit to requested medical examinations' "Proper construction of 'commensurate' in s 10(1A)(b) of Police Regulation (Superannuation) Act 1906"]

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Motion allowed in part

Orders

["Plea 7 in defendant's second amended defence is struck out." 'Defendant granted leave to re-plead plea 7.' 'Plaintiff not required to undergo neuropsychologist or cardiologist examination; examination by general physician permitted.' 'Costs of motion to be costs in the cause.']