Cockburn v Hyne & Son Pty Ltd

[2000] QCA 5

[2000] QCA 5

COURT OF APPEAL

de JERSEY CJ
MCMURDO P
THOMAS JA

Appeal No 9326 of 1999

JOHN TREVOR COCKBURN               Respondent (Plaintiff)

v.

HYNE & SON PTY LTD                  Applicant (Defendant)

BRISBANE

..DATE 02/02/2000

JUDGMENT

THE CHIEF JUSTICE:  Leave should not be given in my view.  Further ventilation of the issues is better reserved to any appeal following a trial judgment.  No injustice of any relevance would result from our taking that course.

There is no question of the loss of any right to plead or ventilate a limitations point, as had been confirmed to us. Furthermore, proper comprehensive consideration of the relevant issues may well involve factual determinations which have not yet been made, for example, whether the claimed injuries amount to injuries within the particular terms of the statutory definition.

It is not, in short, an appropriate vehicle in which we should be making definitive judgments in an area of the law in which a number of cases are currently coming through the system.  I would refuse the application.

THE PRESIDENT:  I agree that this is not an appropriate case in which to grant leave for an interlocutory judgment for the reasons given by the Chief Justice. 

THOMAS JA:  I agree.

THE CHIEF JUSTICE:  The application is refused.

THE CHIEF JUSTICE:  Costs reserved.