Boral Resources (NSW) Pty Ltd v TWU of Australia NSW Branch & Ors [2004] NSWSC 541

Boral Resources (NSW) Pty Ltd v TWU of Australia NSW Branch & Ors [2004] NSWSC 541

Because there were no agreed facts, the issues of liability and quantum were not shown to be clearly demarcated, witness credit issues and evidence would overlap, and separate determination was not shown to save court time or party costs or serve the interests of justice, the Court refused to order a separate determination of liability.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 June 2004
Procedural Posture
Notice of Motion for Separate Hearing and Determination of Liability / Interlocutory Application
Outcome
The plaintiff's notice of motion filed 19 December 2003 was dismissed, with the plaintiff to pay the defendants' costs as agreed or assessed.
Legal Topics
['separate Determination of Liability' 'breach of Contract' 'inducing Breach of Contract' 'conspiracy' 'picketing' 'costs']
['civil Procedure' 'contract Law' 'tort Law' 'industrial Relations'] ['separate Determination of Liability' 'breach of Contract' 'inducing Breach of Contract' 'conspiracy' 'picketing' '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

Notice of Motion for Separate Hearing and Determination of Liability / Interlocutory Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Court should order, pursuant to Part 31 r 2 of the Supreme Court Rules 1970 (NSW), a separate hearing and determination of liability before damages.' 'Whether liability and quantum were sufficiently distinct to make separate determination just, quick and cheap.' 'Whether overlap in evidence, witnesses and credit issues made separate determination inappropriate.']

Ratio Decidendi

Because there were no agreed facts, the issues of liability and quantum were not shown to be clearly demarcated, witness credit issues and evidence would overlap, and separate determination was not shown to save court time or party costs or serve the interests of justice, the Court refused to order a separate determination of liability.

Court Disposition

The plaintiff's notice of motion filed 19 December 2003 was dismissed, with the plaintiff to pay the defendants' costs as agreed or assessed.

Orders

  • ["The plaintiff's notice of motion filed 19 December 2003 is dismissed." "The plaintiff is to pay the defendants' costs as agreed or assessed."]