Damman v Peninsula Health

Damman brought an action against Peninsula Health, alleging sexual assault by a former employee. The dispute centred on Peninsula Health's application to dismiss the claim for being out of time, as the limitation period had expired. The court was required to determine whether the plaintiff could avail herself of the statutory extension under section 27K of the Limitation of Actions Act 1958, considering the deceased status of the key witness and the potential prejudice to the defendant.

The court identified that the key issue was whether the plaintiff could extend the limitation period despite the statutory bar, considering the exceptional circumstances. It was noted that the plaintiff had previously brought proceedings against the former solicitors involved in the initial proceedings. The court had to balance the deceased witness and the associated prejudice against Peninsula Health with the plaintiff's right to seek redress for the alleged sexual assault.

In concluding, the court determined that the plaintiff's application for an extension of the limitation period would be dismissed. The court found that the substantial prejudice caused to Peninsula Health by the deceased key witness and the plaintiff's prior proceedings against the former solicitors were relevant considerations. The court applied the principles from Tsiadis v Patterson and held that the plaintiff's claim was statute-barred. The court dismissed the plaintiff's action, with no orders for costs.