Thomas v Yates and Anor [2008] NSWSC 282

New South Wales Supreme Court

CITATION : Thomas v Yates and Anor [2008] NSWSC 282

HEARING DATE(S) : 31 March 2008

JUDGMENT DATE : 31 March 2008

JURISDICTION : Common Law

JUDGMENT OF : Simpson J

EX TEMPORE JUDGMENT DATE : 31 March 2008

DECISION : Notice of motion dismissed. Plaintiff to pay defendants' costs.

CATCHWORDS : PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - Professional negligence - plaintiff's application for the defendants personally to attend voluntary mediation - whether the Court has power under s 2.1 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules to make such order - whether the Court should order mandatory mediation thereby requiring the defendants to participate - inappropriate use of power conferred by s 26 of the Civil Procedure Act - plaintiff entitled to seek Court ordered mediation if voluntary mediation not productive - application refused

LEGISLATION CITED : Civil Procedure Act 2005

CATEGORY : Procedural and other rulings

PARTIES : Sharon Thomas - (Plaintiff) Jill Yates and Peter Knudsen - (Defendants)

FILE NUMBER(S) : SC 20412/2006

COUNSEL : AP Cheshire - (Plaintiff) D Davies SC - (Defendants)

SOLICITORS : Keddies - (Plaintiff) Yeldham Price O'Brien Lusk - (Defendants)

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES COMMON LAW DIVISION DUTY LIST Simpson J

31 March 2008

20412/06 Sharon Thomas v Jill Yates & Anor

JUDGMENT 1 HER HONOUR: I start by noting that in this matter I did not have available to me the court file. Given the information I have been provided with, although that might create some deficiency in the background material I am able to state, it does not affect the outcome or the substance of the matter. 2 The substantive proceedings involve a claim by the plaintiff against two legal practitioners in respect of advice given, or allegedly negligently omitted to have been given in 2000. That, in turn, arose out of the plaintiff having given birth, as a teenager, to a son who was disabled as a result of the plaintiff having suffered rubella during her pregnancy. 3 It can be discerned, I think, that there are some complex issues involved. I have been told that the defendants carried compulsory insurance cover but that that is limited and, on the plaintiff's case, it falls far below what she would anticipate being awarded by way of verdict if she is successful in her claim.