Chaisumdet v Milperra Hotel

The matter before the court was an application by the plaintiff to add the Milperra Hotel as a defendant in a proceeding commenced against Ms Chaisumdet. The plaintiff sought to add the hotel as a defendant on the basis of vicarious liability, alleging that the injuries sustained by the plaintiff were caused by an employee of the hotel. The Federal Circuit Court considered whether the application could be granted despite the plaintiff not knowing the whereabouts of the hotel, if it was still in existence.

The legal issue before the court was whether the plaintiff's application could be granted, in the absence of any evidence as to the whereabouts of the hotel. The court was required to consider whether the application could proceed, despite the absence of a sufficiently arguable case against the proposed additional defendant.

The court found that the plaintiff had not demonstrated that there was a sufficiently arguable case against the proposed additional defendant, the Milperra Hotel. The court noted that the plaintiff had provided no evidence of the hotel's current existence, or its whereabouts if it did still exist. The court held that the application could not proceed without such evidence, as there was a risk that the court would be wasting its time if the proposed additional defendant did not exist, or could not be found. The application was dismissed.

The court ordered that the application be dismissed and that the plaintiff pay the costs of the application.