Amaca Pty Limited v Cecilia Morrison [2013] NSWSC 1706
The interests of justice favour transfer as Queensland has the most real and substantial connection to the proceedings, witness location, and relevant events. No evidence suggests substantial justice cannot be done in Queensland or that delay will occur. The procedural advantages of the Tribunal are not determinative; key factors support transfer.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 19 November 2013
- Procedural Posture
- Application for Removal and Transfer of Proceedings / Decision on Application
- Outcome
- Orders granted for removal and transfer of proceedings.
- Legal Topics
- ['cross Vesting' 'jurisdiction' 'forum Non Conveniens' 'dust Diseases Litigation' 'transfer of Proceedings']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Application for Removal and Transfer of Proceedings / Decision on Application
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether it is in the interests of justice under s 5(2)(b)(iii) of the Jurisdiction of Courts (Cross-Vesting) Act 1987 for proceedings to be transferred to the Supreme Court of Queensland' 'Whether Queensland is the forum with the most real and substantial connection to the proceedings' 'Whether transfer would cause delay or additional costs' 'Whether procedural or experiential advantages in the Dust Diseases Tribunal justify retention of proceedings']
Ratio Decidendi
The interests of justice favour transfer as Queensland has the most real and substantial connection to the proceedings, witness location, and relevant events. No evidence suggests substantial justice cannot be done in Queensland or that delay will occur. The procedural advantages of the Tribunal are not determinative; key factors support transfer.
Court Disposition
Orders granted for removal and transfer of proceedings.
Orders
- ['Proceedings no 379 of 2013 in the Dust Diseases Tribunal of NSW removed into the Common Law Division of the Supreme Court of NSW pursuant to s 8 of the Jurisdiction of Courts (Cross-Vesting) Act 1987 and/or Part 9 of the Civil Procedure Act 2005 and Part 44, Division 2 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005.'...
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment