State of Queensland v Stephenson [2006] HCA 20

State of Queensland v Stephenson [2006] HCA 20

Where a material fact (relevant to the claimant's right of action) is known before the critical date but only acquires a decisive character after the critical date, the requirements of s 31(2)(a) Limitation of Actions Act 1974 (Q) are satisfied; the phrase mandates identification of the point when material facts of a decisive character first come within the applicant's means of knowledge. The construction adopted by Davies JA in the QCA is preferred; that is, it is the composite fact with its decisive quality that must be unknown before the cutoff. Consequently, time may be extended on that basis.

Parties
Appellant/applicant/respondent: State of Queensland; Respondent: Peter Robert Stephenson; Appellant: Scott William Reeman; Respondent: Timothy James Wrightson
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
17 May 2006
Procedural Posture
Appeals and Application for Special Leave to Appeal / High Court Appeal From the Supreme Court of Queensland (court of Appeal)
Outcome
Appeal in Stephenson dismissed; appeal in Reeman allowed; application for special leave in Wrightson dismissed; Stephenson and Reeman entitled to costs; orders as set out.
Legal Topics
Extension of Limitation Periods, Material Fact of a Decisive Character, Remedial Legislation, Limitation of Actions Act 1974 (q), Ss 30, 31
Limitation of Actions Personal Injury Statutory Interpretation Extension of Limitation Periods Material Fact of a Decisive Character Remedial Legislation Limitation of Actions Act 1974 (q), Ss 30, 31

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 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

State of Queensland

Appellant/applicant/respondent

Peter Robert Stephenson

Respondent

Scott William Reeman

Appellant

Timothy James Wrightson

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeals and Application for Special Leave to Appeal / High Court Appeal From the Supreme Court of Queensland (court of Appeal)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether s 31(2)(a) Limitation of Actions Act 1974 (Q) allows for extension when material facts of a decisive character only attain that quality after the relevant critical date
  2. 2 Definition and ascertainment of 'material fact of a decisive character' and when it is within an applicant's means of knowledge
  3. 3 Whether actual retirement from police service constitutes a material fact of decisive character for extension applications

Ratio Decidendi

Where a material fact (relevant to the claimant's right of action) is known before the critical date but only acquires a decisive character after the critical date, the requirements of s 31(2)(a) Limitation of Actions Act 1974 (Q) are satisfied; the phrase mandates identification of the point when material facts of a decisive character first come within the applicant's means of knowledge. The construction adopted by Davies JA in the QCA is preferred; that is, it is the composite fact with its decisive quality that must be unknown before the cutoff. Consequently, time may be extended on that basis.

Court Disposition

Appeal in Stephenson dismissed; appeal in Reeman allowed; application for special leave in Wrightson dismissed; Stephenson and Reeman entitled to costs; orders as set out.

Orders

  • Stephenson: Appeal dismissed with costs.
  • Reeman: Appeal allowed with costs; orders of Court of Appeal set aside; in lieu, appeal to that Court allowed, orders of Holmes J set aside; period of limitation for action extended to 22 July 2002; respondent to pay appellant's costs of applications and appeal.