Woolworths Limited v Walker [2012] NSWSC 914

Woolworths Limited v Walker [2012] NSWSC 914

The Court was not persuaded that it was in the interests of justice to transfer the proceedings to Victoria. The likely disadvantages, cost consequences, inconvenience and delay to Mr Walker, together with the absence of evidence of inconvenience to Woolworths or its witnesses if the matter remained in Albury, outweighed the factors relied on by Woolworths. The proceedings were civil proceedings for damages and did not become a criminal matter merely because the pleading had referred to s.23 Occupational Health and Safety Act 2004 (Vic).

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
09 August 2012
Procedural Posture
Cross Vesting Application in Civil Personal Injury Proceedings / Summons by Woolworths Limited Seeking Uplift of District Court Proceedings and Transfer to Victoria
Outcome
The Summons filed 27 July 2012 was dismissed, and Woolworths Limited was ordered to pay Mr Walker's costs of the Summons excluding the costs of the appearances before the Registrar and Johnson J on 6 August 2012.
Legal Topics
['transfer of Proceedings' 'interests of Justice' 'slip and Fall Incident' 'forum Considerations' 'costs']
['civil Procedure' 'cross Vesting' 'personal Injury' 'negligence'] ['transfer of Proceedings' 'interests of Justice' 'slip and Fall Incident' 'forum Considerations' '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
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Cross Vesting Application in Civil Personal Injury Proceedings / Summons by Woolworths Limited Seeking Uplift of District Court Proceedings and Transfer to Victoria

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the District Court proceedings should be uplifted to the Supreme Court of New South Wales and transferred to the Supreme Court of Victoria under the Jurisdiction of Courts (Cross-Vesting) Act 1987.' 'Whether reliance on s.23 Occupational Health and Safety Act 2004 (Vic) made the proceedings a criminal matter for the purposes of s.4(5) Cross-Vesting Act.' "Whether the interests of justice favoured transfer to Victoria having regard to forum, cost, convenience, delay, evidence, applicable law and the parties' circumstances." 'What costs order should be made after dismissal of the summons.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Court was not persuaded that it was in the interests of justice to transfer the proceedings to Victoria. The likely disadvantages, cost consequences, inconvenience and delay to Mr Walker, together with the absence of evidence of inconvenience to Woolworths or its witnesses if the matter remained in Albury, outweighed the factors relied on by Woolworths. The proceedings were civil proceedings for damages and did not become a criminal matter merely because the pleading had referred to s.23 Occupational Health and Safety Act 2004 (Vic).

Court Disposition

The Summons filed 27 July 2012 was dismissed, and Woolworths Limited was ordered to pay Mr Walker's costs of the Summons excluding the costs of the appearances before the Registrar and Johnson J on 6 August 2012.

Orders

  • ['The Summons filed 27 July 2012 is dismissed.' "Woolworths is ordered to pay Mr Walker's costs of the Summons, excluding the costs of the appearances before the Registrar and Johnson J on 6 August 2012."]