BHP Billiton Ltd v Utting & Anor [2005] NSWSC 260
The interests of justice did not require transfer of proceedings to South Australia because the Dust Diseases Tribunal of NSW possesses specialised procedures and expertise crucial for expeditious handling of asbestos-related claims, particularly given the plaintiff's terminal illness. These features outweigh the natural forum considerations supporting transfer.
- Parties
- Plaintiff: BHP Billiton Ltd; 1st Defendant: Lawrence Utting; 2nd Defendant: Brambles Australia Ltd
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 01 April 2005
- Procedural Posture
- Cross Vesting Application / Summons Determination
- Outcome
- summons dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Cross Vesting, Forum Non Conveniens, Transfer of Proceedings, Specialist Tribunals, Asbestos Litigation
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
BHP Billiton Ltd
Plaintiff
Lawrence Utting
1st Defendant
Brambles Australia Ltd
2nd Defendant
Procedural Posture
Cross Vesting Application / Summons Determination
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether proceedings commenced in the Dust Diseases Tribunal of NSW should be removed to the Supreme Court of NSW and then transferred to the Supreme Court of South Australia under the Jurisdiction of Courts (Cross-vesting) Act 1987
Ratio Decidendi
The interests of justice did not require transfer of proceedings to South Australia because the Dust Diseases Tribunal of NSW possesses specialised procedures and expertise crucial for expeditious handling of asbestos-related claims, particularly given the plaintiff's terminal illness. These features outweigh the natural forum considerations supporting transfer.
Court Disposition
summons dismissed
Orders
- summons dismissed
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