Murdock v Lipman [2012] NSWSC 983

Murdock v Lipman [2012] NSWSC 983

The Court found it just and reasonable to extend the limitation periods for the plaintiff’s personal injury claims against the first and second defendants due to explanation for delay, substantial impairment suffered by the plaintiff and preserved evidence from WorkCover investigation, and accepted procedural mechanisms for substitution of the insurer; leave to commence proceedings out of time against the employer’s insurer was considered fair and just, subject to addressing potential prejudice concerning indemnity claims.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 August 2012
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application / Ruling on Applications to Extend Limitation Period and for Leave to Commence Proceedings Out of Time
Outcome
Application granted for extension of limitation period as against first and second defendants. Application for leave to bring proceedings against proposed third defendant deferred pending further hearing.
Legal Topics
['extension of Limitation Period' 'workers Compensation Insurer Liability' 'joinder and Substitution of Parties' 'prejudice Due to Limitation Periods' 'contribution Between Tortfeasors']
['limitation of Actions' 'workers Compensation' 'personal Injury'] ['extension of Limitation Period' 'workers Compensation Insurer Liability' 'joinder and Substitution of Parties' 'prejudice Due to Limitation Periods' 'contribution Between Tortfeasors']

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

Interlocutory Application / Ruling on Applications to Extend Limitation Period and for Leave to Commence Proceedings Out of Time

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether it is just and reasonable to extend the limitation period under Limitation Act 1969 s 60C for personal injury claim against first and second defendants' 'Whether the procedural power exists to substitute an insurer for a deregistered company under s 601AG of the Corporations Act 2001' "Whether leave should be granted under s 151D(2) of the Workers Compensation Act 1987 to commence proceedings against the employer's insurer out of time" 'Whether cross-claims for contribution are statute-barred due to limitation periods' 'Whether prejudice exists due to inability to recover indemnity under s 151Z(1)(d)']

Ratio Decidendi

The Court found it just and reasonable to extend the limitation periods for the plaintiff’s personal injury claims against the first and second defendants due to explanation for delay, substantial impairment suffered by the plaintiff and preserved evidence from WorkCover investigation, and accepted procedural mechanisms for substitution of the insurer; leave to commence proceedings out of time against the employer’s insurer was considered fair and just, subject to addressing potential prejudice concerning indemnity claims.

Court Disposition

Application granted for extension of limitation period as against first and second defendants. Application for leave to bring proceedings against proposed third defendant deferred pending further hearing.

Orders

  • ['Limitation period for plaintiff’s cause of action against the first and second defendants extended to 8 June 2010.' 'Proposed third defendant directed to inform the parties and the Associate within 48 hours if it wishes to be heard on indemnity point; failing which, plaintiff may bring orders in chambers.']