Harradine v Cockatoo Dockyard and Ors [2008] NSWDDT 8

Harradine v Cockatoo Dockyard and Ors [2008] NSWDDT 8

The Regulation does not entitle a plaintiff to judgment against a cross-defendant not sued by the plaintiff. Apportionment of liability under the Regulation binds only defendants and cross-defendants inter se, and does not alter the requirement that a plaintiff must have judgment or agreement with any party from whom damages are to be recovered. Thus, BOC Limited is not liable to the plaintiff absent being sued and found liable.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 March 2008
Procedural Posture
Civil / Determination of Separate Questions (notice of Motion on Points of Law Before Substantive Judgment)
Outcome
Application dismissed; questions answered: 1. No, 2. Does not arise.
Legal Topics
['apportionment of Liability' 'contribution Among Tortfeasors' 'dust Diseases' 'statutory Interpretation']
['civil Procedure' 'torts'] ['apportionment of Liability' 'contribution Among Tortfeasors' 'dust Diseases' 'statutory Interpretation']

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 / Determination of Separate Questions (notice of Motion on Points of Law Before Substantive Judgment)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether Clause 52 of the Dust Diseases Tribunal Regulation 2007 and the contributions assessment entitle the plaintiff to judgment against BOC Limited (a cross-defendant not sued by the plaintiff)' 'Whether the regulation could validly impose liability for damages on a person not sued by the plaintiff']

Ratio Decidendi

The Regulation does not entitle a plaintiff to judgment against a cross-defendant not sued by the plaintiff. Apportionment of liability under the Regulation binds only defendants and cross-defendants inter se, and does not alter the requirement that a plaintiff must have judgment or agreement with any party from whom damages are to be recovered. Thus, BOC Limited is not liable to the plaintiff absent being sued and found liable.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed; questions answered: 1. No, 2. Does not arise.

Orders

  • ['Eighth defendant to pay the costs of the plaintiff and BOC of the separate hearing.']