Gill v Wingham Chamber of Commerce [2018] NSWSC 802

Supreme Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Gill v Wingham Chamber of Commerce [2018] NSWSC 802 Hearing dates: 23 May 2018 Date of orders: 23 May 2018 Decision date: 23 May 2018 Jurisdiction: Common Law Before: Campbell J Decision: I confirm the hearing will commence on 18 June 2018 and I permit the concurrent expert evidence of Mr Smith and Dr Zalewski to be taken at a further hearing, fixed at the direction of the Trial Judge. Catchwords: NEGLIGENCE – personal injury - case management - concurrent expert evidence - one expert overseas - appropriateness of audio visual link - efficiency - Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW) - balanced against - voluminous documents - inability to mount case fully and robustly - discretion of Court - Hearing date confirmed - part-heard until expert available for concurrent expert evidence Legislation Cited: Civil Liability Act 2002 (NSW), s 5B; Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW), ss 56 - 60; Evidence (Audio and Audio Visual Links) Act 1998 (NSW) Cases Cited: Walker Charlotte Street v Rio Tinto Services [2014] NSWSC 535 Texts Cited: Nil Category: Procedural and other rulings Parties: Justin Marciel Gill (Plaintiff) Wingham Chamber of Commerce Inc. (Defendant) Representation: Counsel: A Johnson (Plaintiff) G J Parker SC (Defendant)

Solicitors: Everett Evans Solicitors (Plaintiff) HBA Legal (Defendant) File Number(s): 2013/00344173

EX TEMPORE Judgment (revised) 1. An important question about the management of a personal injury case fixed for hearing for five days commencing on 18 June 2018 has arisen for resolution by this Court. I say at once that I will not be the Trial Judge as I will be absent on leave when the trial is to be conducted. My enquiries overnight have indicated that the matter has not been allocated to any particular Judge at this stage, which is not unusual in the general list of the Common Law Division. The case is estimated to take five days or less. The allocation of the matter to a Trial Judge is likely to depend upon the exigencies of the List as they then appear to the List Judge in the period leading up to the hearing. 2. The matter was set down for hearing after appropriate case management by the Registrar on 6 November 2017. I think it can be fairly said the case is one of some complexity. The plaintiff's cause of action is in respect of a serious head injury he suffered at the Christmas Carnival at Wingham on 9 December 2010. That event was conducted by the Wingham Chamber of Commerce Incorporated, which is the defendant. The plaintiff was on the defendant's premises in the course of his business as a showman operating a sideshow for reward and for the enjoyment of the patrons of the Christmas Carnival. At about the scheduled end of the carnival a riot broke out involving many apparently intoxicated persons, some of whom armed themselves with metal stakes or star pickets and engaged in gratuitous criminal violence. 3. The plaintiff, who as I understand the facts, may have been seeking to intervene for the protection of others, was attacked by one such drunken thug, struck with a star picket and suffered very serious head injuries. Without downplaying the seriousness of the ongoing consequences for him as reflected in the parties' agreement as to some heads of damage disclosed in the evidence before me, he has made what at the time must have seemed an unlikely, if not remarkable, recovery.