NSW Caselaw
Supreme Court New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Telstra Corporation Limited v Tucker [2019] NSWSC 1090 Hearing dates: 22 August 2019 Decision date: 23 August 2019 Jurisdiction: Common Law Before: Ierace J Decision: (1) Pursuant to s 8 of the Jurisdiction of Courts (Cross-Vesting) Act 1987 (NSW), proceedings no. 321 of 2018 pending in the Dust Diseases Tribunal of New South Wales between Telstra Corporation Limited (the applicant) as the defendant/cross-claimant and Thomas Wayne Tucker and Caroline Ann Thompson (as Legal Personal Representatives of the Estate of Maureen Ailsa Anne Tucker) (the first respondent) as the plaintiff and associated cross-claim proceedings no. 321 of 2018/1 commenced against Amaca Pty Limited (the second respondent) as the first cross-defendant and Seltsam Pty Limited (the third respondent) as the second cross-defendant ("the DDT proceedings") be removed into the Common Law Division of this Court.
(2) Pursuant to s 5(2)(b)(iii) of the Jurisdiction of Courts (Cross-Vesting) Act 1987 (NSW), the DDT proceedings when removed into this Court be transferred to the Supreme Court of Queensland.
(3) The first respondent's costs of the proceedings filed in the Dust Diseases Tribunal of New South Wales (proceedings no. 321 of 2018) to be the first respondent's costs in the cause of the proceedings to be filed in Queensland.
(4) No order as to costs in respect of the Supreme Court of New South Wales proceedings. Catchwords: CIVIL PROCEDURE — Cross-vesting — Transfer from Dust Diseases Tribunal of NSW to Supreme Court — Transfer to other Supreme Court – Relevant factors Legislation Cited: Jurisdiction of Courts (Cross-Vesting) Act 1987 (Cth) Cases Cited: BHP Billiton Limited v Schultz (2004) 221 CLR 400; [2004] HCA 61 British American Tobacco Australia Services Limited v Laurie [2009] NSWSC 83 Category: Procedural and other rulings Parties: Testra Corporation Limited (Applicant) Thomas Wayne Tucker and Caroline Ann Thompson (as Legal Personal Representatives of the Estate of the Late Maureen Ailsa Anne Tucker) (First Respondents) Amaca Pty Limited (Second Respondent) Seltsam Pty Limited (Third Respondent) Representation: Counsel: E Vail (Applicant) B Williams (First Respondents) E Vail (mentioning for Second Respondent) D Miller (Third Respondent)
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