Hughes v Whittens Group Pty Ltd [2017] NSWSC 329

Hughes v Whittens Group Pty Ltd [2017] NSWSC 329

The application to transfer proceedings to Western Australia is refused because, although the law of Western Australia applies, the plaintiff's fragile mental health, impecuniosity, and the greater disruption and endangerment to his emotional state if forced to travel to Western Australia constitute compelling reasons for the proceedings to remain in New South Wales in the interests of justice.

Parties
Plaintiff: Matthew Hughes; First Defendant: Whittens Group Pty Ltd; Second Defendant: BGC Contracting Pty Ltd
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
31 March 2017
Procedural Posture
Civil / Procedural Ruling on Application to Transfer Proceedings
Outcome
Notice of motion dismissed; costs order for plaintiff; expedition granted; relisting ordered.
Legal Topics
Transfer of Proceedings, Interests of Justice, Expedition, Costs
Civil Procedure Transfer of Proceedings Interests of Justice Expedition 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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Matthew Hughes

Plaintiff

Whittens Group Pty Ltd

First Defendant

BGC Contracting Pty Ltd

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Procedural Ruling on Application to Transfer Proceedings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether proceedings should be transferred from Supreme Court of New South Wales to Supreme Court of Western Australia under s 5(2)(b)(iii) of the Jurisdiction of Courts (Cross-Vesting) Act 1987 (NSW) in the interests of justice

Ratio Decidendi

The application to transfer proceedings to Western Australia is refused because, although the law of Western Australia applies, the plaintiff's fragile mental health, impecuniosity, and the greater disruption and endangerment to his emotional state if forced to travel to Western Australia constitute compelling reasons for the proceedings to remain in New South Wales in the interests of justice.

Court Disposition

Notice of motion dismissed; costs order for plaintiff; expedition granted; relisting ordered.

Orders

  • The notice of motion of the first defendant of 10 January 2017 is dismissed.
  • The first defendant must pay the costs of the plaintiff of the proceedings before me.