Milan Deur v Regent Metal Roofing Pty Ltd [2019] NSWDC 289

Milan Deur v Regent Metal Roofing Pty Ltd [2019] NSWDC 289

The plaintiff's explanation for delay in commencing proceedings was found to be full and satisfactory, as no advice was given about the limitation period by his solicitors; he acted prudently by instructing solicitors and following their advice. No actual prejudice was shown to have occurred due to the delay, and inferred prejudice was not sufficient to deny a fair trial. Therefore, leave to proceed out of time was properly granted.

Parties
Plaintiff: Milan Deur; Defendant: Regent Metal Roofing Pty Ltd
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 May 2019
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Commence Proceedings Out of Time / Ruling on Application for Leave Under S 109(1) and (3) of Motor Accidents Compensation Act 1999 (nsw)
Outcome
Leave granted to commence proceedings out of time under s 109(1) and (3) Motor Accidents Compensation Act 1999 (NSW)
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Limitation Periods, Motor Accidents Compensation, Procedural Fairness
Civil Procedure Personal Injury Extension of Time Limitation Periods Motor Accidents Compensation Procedural Fairness

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 4 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Milan Deur

Plaintiff

Regent Metal Roofing Pty Ltd

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Commence Proceedings Out of Time / Ruling on Application for Leave Under S 109(1) and (3) of Motor Accidents Compensation Act 1999 (nsw)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff provided a full and satisfactory explanation for delay in commencing proceedings under s 109(3) of the Motor Accidents Compensation Act 1999 (NSW)
  2. 2 Whether leave should be granted to commence proceedings out of time

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff's explanation for delay in commencing proceedings was found to be full and satisfactory, as no advice was given about the limitation period by his solicitors; he acted prudently by instructing solicitors and following their advice. No actual prejudice was shown to have occurred due to the delay, and inferred prejudice was not sufficient to deny a fair trial. Therefore, leave to proceed out of time was properly granted.

Court Disposition

Leave granted to commence proceedings out of time under s 109(1) and (3) Motor Accidents Compensation Act 1999 (NSW)

Orders

  • Leave granted to plaintiff to commence proceedings out of time by filing and serving Statement of Claim in the form of Proposed Statement of Claim being Exhibit D.
  • One third of the costs of the summons, including preparation of Exhibit SPF1 to the affidavit of Mr Firth made 18 September 2018 and Exhibit 1 to the affidavit of Mr Firth made 14 November 2018, to be plaintiff's costs in the cause in the principal proceedings.