|
Austructures Pty Ltd
v Makin (VSC) - corporations - pleadings - leave to
amend certain paragraphs of statement of claim
|
|
Oram v BHP Mitsui
Coal Pty Ltd (VSC) - limitation of actions -
psychiatric injury arising out of mine disaster in 1994 - prejudice
|
| Summaries With Link (Five Minute Read) |
Austructures Pty Ltd
v Makin
[2014] VSC 544
Supreme Court of Victoria
Almond J
Corporations - pleadings - limitations - plaintiffs
alleged contraventions by first defendant of duties under ss180(1), 181(1),
182(1) & 183(1) Corporations Act 2001
(Cth) - statement of claim also set out limited claims against second defendant
- plaintiffs sought to amend statement of claim - plaintiffs submitted proposed
amendments expanded existing claims based on breaches of the Act to include
claims against second defendant - plaintiff also submitted amendments would
allow plaintiffs to seek extension of time, if necessary, for commencing
proceeding for breach of statutory obligations, and that they claimed from
second defendant any benefit it received from first defendant's breaches of
fiduciary obligations - addition of statute-barred causes of action -
discretion to extend time - ss1317K & 1322(4) - no later than - held: Court did not have discretion to extend time
for commencing claim for compensation order under s1317H - leave to amend
pleadings in respect of new claims of knowledge of contravening conduct refused
- leave to amend concerning claims of advantage obtained by second defendant
allowed so that question of first defendant's legal capacity between himself
and second defendant at relevant times could be determined at trial.
Austructures Pty Ltd
|
Oram v BHP Mitsui
Coal Pty Ltd
[2014] QSC 230
Supreme Court of Queensland
McMeekin J
Limitation of actions - applicant sought damages in 2011
from employer for psychiatric illness arising from mine disaster which occurred
in 1994 - applicant sought to extend limitation period - ss30 & 31 Limitation of Actions Act 1974 (Qld) -
employer's liability for psychiatric harm - delay - applicant's onus of showing
that the justice of the case required the exercise of discretion - held:
applicant had reasonable prospect of persuading tribunal of fact
that psychiatric injury to surviving employee was foreseeable outcome of
exposure to disaster - however prejudice to employer was sufficiently great
that Court could not be satisfied that fair trial could be held - applicant had
not discharged onus - proceedings left on foot to allow applicant to pursue
issue of expiration of limitation period - application dismissed unless
submissions are received on or before 4pm on 26 September 2014.
Oram
|
Download PDF
Follow us
Search
