Lam v Rolls Royce PLC (No 6) [2017] NSWSC 1288

Lam v Rolls Royce PLC (No 6) [2017] NSWSC 1288

The 35 registered group members had ample opportunity and clear notice to file and serve particulars and supporting evidence, including notice that failure to seek an extension by 20 September 2017 could result in dismissal operating as a final determination of their rights. No extension motion was filed. In those circumstances, and under s 183 of the Civil Procedure Act 2005, it was appropriate to bring their claims to an end and give the defendant certainty.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
21 September 2017
Procedural Posture
Representative Action / Defendant's Application to Dismiss Claims of Registered Group Members Who Had Not Filed Particulars or Supporting Evidence
Outcome
Application granted; claims of the specified group members dismissed as a final determination of their rights.
Legal Topics
['class Closure' 'dismissal of Group Member Claims' 'want of Prosecution' 'psychological Injury Claims' 'notice to Group Members']
['civil Procedure' 'representative Proceedings'] ['class Closure' 'dismissal of Group Member Claims' 'want of Prosecution' 'psychological Injury Claims' 'notice to Group Members']

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 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Representative Action / Defendant's Application to Dismiss Claims of Registered Group Members Who Had Not Filed Particulars or Supporting Evidence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Court should dismiss the claims of registered group members who failed to file and serve statements of particulars and supporting evidence in accordance with earlier orders.' "Whether dismissal should operate as a final determination of those group members' rights to claim damages or other relief against the defendant arising out of the events on board QF32 on 4 November 2010." 'Whether notice requirements associated with an application for dismissal for want of prosecution affected the application.']

Ratio Decidendi

The 35 registered group members had ample opportunity and clear notice to file and serve particulars and supporting evidence, including notice that failure to seek an extension by 20 September 2017 could result in dismissal operating as a final determination of their rights. No extension motion was filed. In those circumstances, and under s 183 of the Civil Procedure Act 2005, it was appropriate to bring their claims to an end and give the defendant certainty.

Court Disposition

Application granted; claims of the specified group members dismissed as a final determination of their rights.

Orders

  • ['Order that all claims by group members for damages or other relief against the defendant arising out of the events on board QF32 on 4 November 2010 who have not, in accordance with the orders made on 1 June 2016, filed and served their statement of particulars and served their evidence in support of their claim...