Carlowe v Frigmobile P/L

The appeal was heard by the Supreme Court of Victoria, with the respondent, Carlowe, seeking to extend the limitation period for an action for psychiatric injuries, in addition to the physical injuries for which he had already been awarded compensation. The appellant, Frigmobile P/L, sought to prevent this extension, arguing that the respondent had failed to bring the action for psychiatric injuries within the required statutory time frame.

The court had to determine whether the statutory limitation period for bringing an action for psychiatric injuries should be extended, given that the respondent had already successfully brought an action for physical injuries arising from the same incident. The court also had to consider whether the doctrine of equitable estoppel could be applied to prevent the appellant from relying on the limitation period as a defence.

The Supreme Court of Victoria dismissed the appeal, holding that the statutory limitation period for bringing an action for psychiatric injuries should not be extended. The court found that the respondent had failed to establish that he was unable to bring the action within the statutory time frame due to some disability or obstruction, as required by the Limitation of Actions Act 1958 (Vic). The court also held that the doctrine of equitable estoppel did not apply, as the respondent had not made a representation upon which the appellant had relied to their detriment. The appeal was therefore dismissed.