NSW Caselaw
Supreme Court New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Harrod v MetLife Insurance Limited [2019] NSWSC 28 Hearing dates: 2 November 2018 Date of orders: 20 February 2019 Decision date: 20 February 2019 Jurisdiction: Equity Before: Slattery J Decision: Plaintiff must attend medical examination. Directions made for the future conduct of the proceedings. Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – plaintiff refuses to submit to further medical examination – plaintiff required to submit to a medical examination as a condition of further pursuing proceedings. Legislation Cited: Civil Procedure Act 2005, ss 56, 57, 58 Insurance Contracts Act 1984 (Cth), s13 Practice Note SC Gen 10 Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005, Part 23 Cases Cited: Boral Transport Pty Ltd v Gulic [2013] NSWCA 150 KF by her tutor RF v Royal Alexandra Hospital for Children [2010] NSWSC 891 Rowlands v State of New South Wales (2009) 74 NSWLR 715 Category: Procedural and other rulings Parties: Applicant/Second Defendant: MetLife Insurance Limited ABN 75 004 274 882 Respondent/Plaintiff: Jenny-Lee Harrod First Defendant: FSS Trustee Corporation Representation: Counsel: Plaintiff: T. Ower Second Defendant: S. J. Walsh
Solicitors: Plaintiff: Stuart Gray, Cardillo Gray Partners Second Defendant: Lisa Jane Norris, TurksLegal File Number(s): 2016/317964 Publication restriction: No
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