GEOFFREY JOHN THOMAS BREAR v JAMES HARDIE & COY PTY LTD & ANOR [2000] NSWCA 352
Section 12A of the Dust Diseases Tribunal Act 1989 does not displace the operation of the Choice of Law (Limitation Provisions) Act 1993 (NSW), and the Queensland statute of limitations applies as substantive law to bar Queensland-based claims; there was no error by the trial judge in declining an award for economic loss where evidence was lacking.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 04 December 2000
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment Following Appeal From Dust Diseases Tribunal
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed with costs.
- Legal Topics
- ['limitation of Actions' 'procedural Versus Substantive Law' 'choice of Law in Tort' 'dust Diseases Tribunal Act' 'limitation Statutes and Their Operation' 'damages for Economic Loss']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment Following Appeal From Dust Diseases Tribunal
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether s12A of the Dust Diseases Tribunal Act 1989 displaces the Choice of Law (Limitation Provisions) Act 1993 (NSW) in Tribunal proceedings' 'Whether the trial judge erred in refusing an award for economic loss']
Ratio Decidendi
Section 12A of the Dust Diseases Tribunal Act 1989 does not displace the operation of the Choice of Law (Limitation Provisions) Act 1993 (NSW), and the Queensland statute of limitations applies as substantive law to bar Queensland-based claims; there was no error by the trial judge in declining an award for economic loss where evidence was lacking.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Orders
- ['Appeal dismissed.' 'Appellant to pay the costs of the respondents.']
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