Lieng v Coles Group Supply Chain Pty Ltd [2023] NSWDC 550

Lieng v Coles Group Supply Chain Pty Ltd [2023] NSWDC 550

Leave was granted because the justice of the case required it: the plaintiff had relied on his solicitors and cooperated with them, the solicitors pursued the claim appropriately, significant delay was explained by the need for the plaintiff's condition to stabilise, impairment to be assessed and statutory work injury damages preconditions to be met, and the defendant had immediate notice of the injury, preserved evidence, monitored treatment, and identified no actual prejudice; the asserted possible prejudice from a future amendment was speculative.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 December 2023
Procedural Posture
Application Under Section 151 D of the Workers Compensation Act 1987 for Leave to Commence Proceedings for Work Injury Damages More Than 3 Years After the Date of Injury / Procedural Ruling on Leave to Commence Proceedings Out of Time Nunc Pro Tunc
Outcome
Application granted.
Legal Topics
['work Injury Damages' 'leave to Commence Proceedings Out of Time' 'three Year Time Limit After Date of Injury' 'prejudice From Delay' 'statutory Preconditions for Work Injury Damages Proceedings']
['negligence' 'workers Compensation' 'civil Procedure'] ['work Injury Damages' 'leave to Commence Proceedings Out of Time' 'three Year Time Limit After Date of Injury' 'prejudice From Delay' 'statutory Preconditions for Work Injury Damages Proceedings']

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

Application Under Section 151 D of the Workers Compensation Act 1987 for Leave to Commence Proceedings for Work Injury Damages More Than 3 Years After the Date of Injury / Procedural Ruling on Leave to Commence Proceedings Out of Time Nunc Pro Tunc

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether leave should be granted under section 151D of the Workers Compensation Act 1987 to commence work injury damages proceedings more than 3 years after the injury.' "Whether the delay was explained by the plaintiff's recovery, assessment of permanent impairment, statutory preconditions and the conduct of his solicitors." 'Whether granting leave would cause prejudice to the defendant.']

Ratio Decidendi

Leave was granted because the justice of the case required it: the plaintiff had relied on his solicitors and cooperated with them, the solicitors pursued the claim appropriately, significant delay was explained by the need for the plaintiff's condition to stabilise, impairment to be assessed and statutory work injury damages preconditions to be met, and the defendant had immediate notice of the injury, preserved evidence, monitored treatment, and identified no actual prejudice; the asserted possible prejudice from a future amendment was speculative.

Court Disposition

Application granted.

Orders

  • ['Pursuant to s151D of the Workers Compensation Act, 1987, grant leave to the plaintiff nunc pro tunc to commence these proceedings.' 'The costs of the application be costs in the cause.' 'The exhibits may be returned.']