Dyczynski v Gibson [2020] FCAFC 120

Dyczynski v Gibson [2020] FCAFC 120

The appellants remained class members during the relevant period; their claims were not properly abandoned by concession made without authority or instruction by the representative applicant or her lawyers; the orders dismissing the proceeding should not have been made without notice to or opportunity for the appellants to participate; and they are entitled to pursue their claims, subject to limitation arguments.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 July 2020
Procedural Posture
Appellate / Appeal From Representative Proceeding (orders Approving Settlement and Dismissing Proceeding)
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
['class Actions' 'international Air Carriage' 'professional Conduct' 'jurisdiction' 'limitation of Actions']
['civil Procedure' 'aviation Law'] ['class Actions' 'international Air Carriage' 'professional Conduct' 'jurisdiction' 'limitation of Actions']

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

Appellate / Appeal From Representative Proceeding (orders Approving Settlement and Dismissing Proceeding)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether appellants were class members at the time of settlement and entitled to pursue claims' "Whether the Federal Court had jurisdiction under Article 33 of the Montreal Convention for appellants' claims" 'Whether the settlement approval and dismissal orders were effective to bind un-notified class members' 'Whether the conduct of legal representatives was compliant with professional obligations' 'Whether the limitation period extinguished the appellants’ claim']

Ratio Decidendi

The appellants remained class members during the relevant period; their claims were not properly abandoned by concession made without authority or instruction by the representative applicant or her lawyers; the orders dismissing the proceeding should not have been made without notice to or opportunity for the appellants to participate; and they are entitled to pursue their claims, subject to limitation arguments.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • ['Time for filing the appeal extended so that the appeal is within time.' 'Leave granted to file a further amended notice of appeal and to Malaysian Airlines to file notice of contention as specified.' 'Leave otherwise refused to extend time for cross-appeal and notice of contention by Malaysian Airlines.'...