Johnson v State of New South Wales; Jones v State of New South Wales; Fitzgerald v State of New South Wales [2017] NSWSC 1613

Johnson v State of New South Wales; Jones v State of New South Wales; Fitzgerald v State of New South Wales [2017] NSWSC 1613

Although the Defendant achieved a measure of success in obtaining acceptance that the limitation issues should be identified and taken forward, the Defendant's Notices of Motion were not resolved to finality and remained adjourned, so the relevant event for costs purposes was not complete. The appropriate order was therefore to reserve costs in each matter.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 November 2017
Procedural Posture
Common Law Damages Proceedings; Procedural Costs Ruling on Defendant's Notices of Motion Concerning Limitation Issues / Costs of the Defendant's Notices of Motion Reserved
Outcome
Costs of the Defendant's Notice of Motion reserved in each matter.
Legal Topics
['extension of Limitation Periods' 'separate Determination of Issues' 'summary Judgment Application' 'costs Following the Event' 'psychiatric Injury Claims by Former Police Officers']
['costs' 'civil Procedure' 'limitation of Actions' 'personal Injury'] ['extension of Limitation Periods' 'separate Determination of Issues' 'summary Judgment Application' 'costs Following the Event' 'psychiatric Injury Claims by Former Police Officers']

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

Common Law Damages Proceedings; Procedural Costs Ruling on Defendant's Notices of Motion Concerning Limitation Issues / Costs of the Defendant's Notices of Motion Reserved

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the costs of the Defendant's Notices of Motion should be determined immediately or reserved in each matter." 'Whether the limitation issues should proceed separately and be identified before the final hearing of the substantive claims.']

Ratio Decidendi

Although the Defendant achieved a measure of success in obtaining acceptance that the limitation issues should be identified and taken forward, the Defendant's Notices of Motion were not resolved to finality and remained adjourned, so the relevant event for costs purposes was not complete. The appropriate order was therefore to reserve costs in each matter.

Court Disposition

Costs of the Defendant's Notice of Motion reserved in each matter.

Orders

  • ['The costs of the Notices of Motion heard on 21 November 2017 in the matters of Mr Johnson and Mr Jones are reserved.' 'The costs of the Notice of Motion heard on 22 November 2017 in the matter of Mr Fitzgerald are reserved.' 'The Notices of Motion in each case are stood over to 5 July 2018.']