Ratko v Ratko [2003] NSWCA 219
It was open to the trial judge to find that the opponent had a real case to advance that his shoulder injury was caused by the accident and to regard his personal circumstances as a satisfactory explanation for the delay; there was no evidence of actual prejudice caused to the claimant by the delay.
- Parties
- Claimant: Mario Ratko; Opponent: Franc Ratko
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 07 August 2003
- Procedural Posture
- Application for Leave to Appeal / Decision on Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal
- Outcome
- Time to apply for leave to appeal extended; application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.
- Legal Topics
- Extension of Limitation Period, Just and Reasonable Grounds for Extension, Prejudice Due to Delay
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Mario Ratko
Claimant
Franc Ratko
Opponent
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal / Decision on Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 whether opponent had a real case to advance that his injury was caused by accident
- 2 whether it is just and reasonable to extend limitation period under s 60C of the Limitation Act 1969
- 3 adequacy of reasons for delay
Ratio Decidendi
It was open to the trial judge to find that the opponent had a real case to advance that his shoulder injury was caused by the accident and to regard his personal circumstances as a satisfactory explanation for the delay; there was no evidence of actual prejudice caused to the claimant by the delay.
Court Disposition
Time to apply for leave to appeal extended; application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.
Orders
- Time to apply for leave to appeal extended
- Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs
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