Taing v Nguyen (No 2) [2016] NSWSC 1440

Taing v Nguyen (No 2) [2016] NSWSC 1440

The plaintiff was aware of the listing but did not appear, had a long history of delay, had failed for a long period to provide adequate particulars of his damages claim and a proper evidentiary statement, and had already received substantial indulgences including referrals for pro bono assistance. The Court was satisfied that he had not prosecuted the proceedings with due dispatch and dismissed the proceedings under Uniform Civil Procedure Rules r 12.7(1), notwithstanding that the claim was for personal injury.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 September 2016
Procedural Posture
Proceedings for Damages for Assault; Procedural Show Cause Dismissal Application / Show Cause Hearing Under Uniform Civil Procedure Rules R 12.7 for Alleged Failure to Prosecute With Due Dispatch
Outcome
Proceedings dismissed; plaintiff ordered to pay the first defendant's costs of the proceedings.
Legal Topics
['dismissal for Want of Prosecution' 'show Cause Hearing' 'failure to Prosecute With Due Dispatch' 'pleadings' 'assault']
['civil Procedure' 'personal Injury'] ['dismissal for Want of Prosecution' 'show Cause Hearing' 'failure to Prosecute With Due Dispatch' 'pleadings' 'assault']

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

Proceedings for Damages for Assault; Procedural Show Cause Dismissal Application / Show Cause Hearing Under Uniform Civil Procedure Rules R 12.7 for Alleged Failure to Prosecute With Due Dispatch

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the proceedings should be dismissed under Uniform Civil Procedure Rules r 12.7 because the plaintiff failed to prosecute them with due dispatch.' 'Whether the statement of claim disclosed a reasonable cause of action.']

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff was aware of the listing but did not appear, had a long history of delay, had failed for a long period to provide adequate particulars of his damages claim and a proper evidentiary statement, and had already received substantial indulgences including referrals for pro bono assistance. The Court was satisfied that he had not prosecuted the proceedings with due dispatch and dismissed the proceedings under Uniform Civil Procedure Rules r 12.7(1), notwithstanding that the claim was for personal injury.

Court Disposition

Proceedings dismissed; plaintiff ordered to pay the first defendant's costs of the proceedings.

Orders

  • ['The proceedings be dismissed pursuant to Uniform Civil Procedure Rules, r 12.7(1).' "The plaintiff pay the first defendant's costs of the proceedings."]