Ruiz-Diaz v Aroyan and Ruiz-Diaz v Antal [2009] NSWDC 252

Ruiz-Diaz v Aroyan and Ruiz-Diaz v Antal [2009] NSWDC 252

The plaintiff provided a full and satisfactory explanation for the delay, having relied on her former solicitors. For both claims, medical evidence showed she had a real (not remote) chance of satisfying the necessary quantum threshold. The defendants were ordered to pay the plaintiff's costs on the ordinary basis because the opposition in the 2578/2009 case was wholly unreasonable and in the other case the defendant only conceded at the last minute. However, there was no substantial injustice justifying indemnity costs.

Parties
Plaintiff: Cristina Maria Ruiz-Diaz; Defendant (2576 of 2009): Andrew Joseph Aroyan; Defendant (2578 of 2009): Christopher Antal
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 October 2009
Procedural Posture
Civil / Application for Leave to File Statement of Claim Out of Time Under S 109 Motor Accidents Compensation Act 1999
Outcome
Leave granted to the plaintiff to file her statement of claim out of time in both proceedings; costs awarded to plaintiff on the ordinary basis; both cases to be heard together at trial.
Legal Topics
Limitation of Actions, Extension of Time, Motor Vehicle Accidents, Costs
Civil Procedure Personal Injury Limitation of Actions Extension of Time Motor Vehicle Accidents 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 4 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Cristina Maria Ruiz-Diaz

Plaintiff

Andrew Joseph Aroyan

Defendant (2576 of 2009)

Christopher Antal

Defendant (2578 of 2009)

Procedural Posture

Civil / Application for Leave to File Statement of Claim Out of Time Under S 109 Motor Accidents Compensation Act 1999

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff should be granted leave to file her statement of claim out of time under s 109 Motor Accidents Compensation Act 1999 for each collision
  2. 2 Whether a full and satisfactory explanation is provided for delay in commencing proceedings
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiff is likely to meet the statutory quantum threshold under s 109(3)(b)

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff provided a full and satisfactory explanation for the delay, having relied on her former solicitors. For both claims, medical evidence showed she had a real (not remote) chance of satisfying the necessary quantum threshold. The defendants were ordered to pay the plaintiff's costs on the ordinary basis because the opposition in the 2578/2009 case was wholly unreasonable and in the other case the defendant only conceded at the last minute. However, there was no substantial injustice justifying indemnity costs.

Court Disposition

Leave granted to the plaintiff to file her statement of claim out of time in both proceedings; costs awarded to plaintiff on the ordinary basis; both cases to be heard together at trial.

Orders

  • Plaintiff in each case is granted leave to file her statement of claim by 27 October 2009
  • At trial, both cases are to be heard together