NSW Caselaw
Supreme Court New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: LSR3 v New South Wales [2024] NSWSC 1570 Hearing dates: 23 September 2024 Date of orders: 06 December 2024 Decision date: 06 December 2024 Jurisdiction: Common Law Before: Faulkner J Decision: The Notice of Motion filed on 6 August 2024 is dismissed with costs. Catchwords: PROCEDURE – application for separate questions under UCPR 28.2 – where plaintiff seeks orders under Part 1C of the Civil Liability Act 2002 to set aside settlement agreements which may otherwise preclude the plaintiff from maintaining the balance of the proceedings – claimed benefit to defendants of plaintiff's promise to "take no action"– statutory right to commence proceedings subsequently enacted – construction of s 7D(1) of the Civil Liability Act 2002 – overlap in issues and credit for hearing of separate questions and the balance of the proceedings – application for separate questions rejected. Legislation Cited: Civil Liability Act 2002 (NSW), ss 7A, 7B, 7C, 7D, 7E, 7F Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW), s 56(2) Limitation Act 1969 (NSW), ss 6A, 62A Limitation Act 2005 (WA), s 92 Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005, r 28.2 Cases Cited: Australian National Industries Ltd v Spedley Securities Ltd (in liq) (1992) 26 NSWLR 411 Bank of Credit and Commerce International SA v Ali [2002] 1 AC 251 Bass v Permanent Trustee Co Ltd [1999] HCA 9; (1999) 198 CLR 334 Brisbane South Regional Health Authority v Taylor (1996) 186 CLR 541 Buurabalayji Thalanyji Aboriginal Corp v Onslow Salt Pty Ltd (No 4) [2019] FCA 1275 EXV v Uniting Church in Australia Property Trust (NSW) [2024] NSWSC 490 Fell v Fell [1922] HCA 55; (1922) 31 CLR 268 Glacken v Tooth & Co Ltd [1935] HCA 68; (1935) 54 CLR 97 Owners Corporation SP 70672 v Trustees of Roman Catholic Church [2010] NSWSC 946 Perre v Apand Pty Ltd [1999] HCA 36; (1999) 198 CLR 180 Tallglen v Pay TV Holdings Pty Ltd (1996) 22 ACSR 130 Tepko Pty Ltd v Water Board [2001] HCA 19; (2001) 206 CLR 1 Trustees of the Roman Catholic Church for the Archdioceses of Sydney v Ellis [2007] NSWCA 117 Category: Procedural rulings Parties: LSR3 (Plaintiff) State of New South Wales (First Defendant) South East Sydney Local Health District (Tenth Defendant) Representation: Counsel: D Weinberger / D Emmerig (Plaintiff) D Lloyd SC / D Hume (First and Tenth Defendants)
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate