Brejcha v Krieger [2020] NSWSC 964

Brejcha v Krieger [2020] NSWSC 964

Because the plaintiff was a group member in the Federal Court Ethicon class action and similar damages were claimed in that proceeding, the interests of justice made the Federal Court the more appropriate forum for determination of the proceeding. The plaintiff's explanation for seeking transfer only after the decisions in Gill v Ethicon Sarl (No 5) and West v Rane (No 2) was accepted, so the costs of the motion were ordered to be costs in the cause.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
28 July 2020
Procedural Posture
Civil Procedure; Cross Vesting Transfer Application in Medical Negligence Proceedings / Plaintiff's Notice of Motion Seeking Transfer of the Proceeding to the Federal Court of Australia Under S 5(1) of the Jurisdiction of Courts (cross Vesting) Act 1987 (nsw)
Outcome
Proceeding transferred to the Federal Court of Australia; costs of the notice of motion ordered to be costs in the cause.
Legal Topics
['transfer to Federal Court of Australia' 'interests of Justice' 'costs of Notice of Motion' 'class Action Group Membership']
['civil Procedure' 'cross Vesting' 'medical Negligence'] ['transfer to Federal Court of Australia' 'interests of Justice' 'costs of Notice of Motion' 'class Action Group Membership']

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

Civil Procedure; Cross Vesting Transfer Application in Medical Negligence Proceedings / Plaintiff's Notice of Motion Seeking Transfer of the Proceeding to the Federal Court of Australia Under S 5(1) of the Jurisdiction of Courts (cross Vesting) Act 1987 (nsw)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether, having regard to the interests of justice, it was more appropriate that the proceeding be determined by the Federal Court of Australia.' "What costs order should be made on the plaintiff's notice of motion."]

Ratio Decidendi

Because the plaintiff was a group member in the Federal Court Ethicon class action and similar damages were claimed in that proceeding, the interests of justice made the Federal Court the more appropriate forum for determination of the proceeding. The plaintiff's explanation for seeking transfer only after the decisions in Gill v Ethicon Sarl (No 5) and West v Rane (No 2) was accepted, so the costs of the motion were ordered to be costs in the cause.

Court Disposition

Proceeding transferred to the Federal Court of Australia; costs of the notice of motion ordered to be costs in the cause.

Orders

  • ['Pursuant to s 5(1) of the Jurisdiction of Courts (Cross-Vesting) Act 1987 (NSW) this proceeding is transferred to the Federal Court of Australia.' 'The costs of this notice of motion are to be costs in the cause.']