Ashok Kumar Duraisamy v Sydney Trains [2019] NSWSC 199

Supreme Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Ashok Kumar Duraisamy v Sydney Trains [2019] NSWSC 199 Hearing dates: 15 February 2019 Date of orders: 05 March 2019 Decision date: 05 March 2019 Jurisdiction: Common Law Before: Ierace J Decision: (1) The proceedings be stayed pursuant to rule 12.10 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW) until payment of costs in the following matters:

(a) case number 2017/00347036 in the District Court; and (b) case number 2018/00125435 in the Local Court.

(2) Plaintiff to pay the defendant's costs. Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE — Judgments and orders — Stay of proceedings — Pending payment of costs Legislation Cited: Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW) Cases Cited: Agar v Hyde (2000) 201 CLR 552 Ashok Kumar Duraisamy v Sydney Trains [2017] FWC 4824 Ashok Kumar Duraisamy v Sydney Trains [2017] FWCFB 5842 Spencer v Commonwealth of Australia (2010) 241 CLR 118; [2010] HCA 28; Category: Procedural and other rulings Parties: Ashok Kumar Duraisamy (Plaintiff) Sydney Trains (Defendant) Representation: Counsel: Self-represented (Plaintiff) E Raper (Defendant)

Solicitors: In person (Plaintiff) Bartier Perry (Defendant) File Number(s): 2018/296875

Judgment 1. On 28 September 2018, Ashok Kumar Duraisamy, (the plaintiff), filed a statement of claim against Sydney Trains Pty Ltd claiming "wages and compensatory damages" in the sum of $125,292. This amount was itemised (paragraph 10) as comprising "unpaid wages" ($3,622.42), "Legal Counsel fees" ($12,500), "District Court Cost" (21,721), "Local Court Cost" ($547) and "compensatory damages, calculated at "$3,622 x 24 due from Nov 2016" ($86,908). I note that those sums in fact render a total of $125,298.42. 2. On 3 December 2018, Sydney Trains Pty Ltd (the defendant) filed a Notice of Motion seeking to have the proceedings summarily dismissed pursuant to rule 13.4(1)(a), (b) and/or (c) of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW) ("the UCPR") and, in the alternative, that they be stayed pursuant to r 12.10 of the UCPR. 3. The hearing of the defendant's Notice of Motion took place on 15 February 2019. The plaintiff was unrepresented. 4. For the reasons which appear in this judgement, I have determined that the proceedings filed by the plaintiff ought to be stayed pursuant to r 12.10 of the UCPR, pending payment of the defendant's costs in earlier proceedings in the District and Local Courts.