Air Link Pty Ltd v Paterson

The case of *Air Link Pty Ltd v Paterson* involved a dispute concerning a passenger's claim for personal injury sustained while disembarking from an aircraft. The passenger, Mr Paterson, brought an action against the carrier, Air Link Pty Ltd, seeking damages under Part IV of the *Civil Aviation (Carriers' Liability) Act 1959* (Cth). The central question before the High Court of Australia was whether Mr Paterson's action had been validly brought within the two-year time limit prescribed by the Act, or if the right to damages had been extinguished by the effluxion of time.

The High Court was required to determine whether Mr Paterson's original statement of claim constituted an "action" brought under Part IV of the *Carriers' Act* within the meaning of the statutory limitation period. This involved considering whether the imperfections in the pleading were so significant as to deprive the initiating process of the character of a validly commenced action, or if it was merely a defective but sufficient commencement. The Court also had to consider the implications of local law and practice in defining what constitutes the bringing of an action, particularly in light of the provisions of the Warsaw Convention, which the *Carriers' Act* largely adopted.

The Court reasoned that while an action must be a claim for damages brought for the passenger's benefit within the specified time, the precise content of such an action is not defined by the *Carriers' Act* or the Warsaw Convention. Instead, it is governed by local law and practice, consistent with Article 28.2 of the Warsaw Convention which states that questions of procedure are governed by the law of the court seised. The High Court found that the Court of Appeal had correctly concluded that Mr Paterson's action was not brought within the two-year period because the statement of claim was not sufficiently clear in its invocation of Part IV of the *Carriers' Act*.

In Matter No S420/2004, the appeal was dismissed with costs. In Matter No S57/2005, special leave to appeal was granted, the appeal was allowed with costs, and the orders of the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of New South Wales were set aside and replaced with an order dismissing the appeal to that Court with costs.