Dyer v Dyno Nobel Asia Pacific Limited Formerly Dyno Wesfarmers Limited Knuckey and 3 Ors v Dyno Nobel Asia Pacific Limited Formerly Dyno Wesfarmers Limited

In the case, the plaintiffs, including relatives of a deceased who died in an accident in Papua New Guinea, brought proceedings under the NSW Compensation to Relatives Act against Dyno Nobel Asia Pacific Limited. The defendants argued that the plaintiffs' statements of claim were statute-barred under Papua New Guinea's limitations legislation. The primary legal issue was whether the plaintiffs' claims, which were initially brought under the NSW Act, could be amended to include claims under the Wrongs Act of Papua New Guinea following the High Court's decision in Regie National des Usines Renault SA v Zhang. The court had to determine if the amendment was permissible and if the Papua New Guinea limitations legislation could defeat the claims.

The court considered the effect of the High Court decision in Zhang, which held that foreign limitation periods could be applied in Australia if they would be applied in the foreign jurisdiction. It was also necessary to determine whether the plaintiffs' claims were statute-barred in Papua New Guinea and if those limitations could be applied to defeat the claims under the NSW Act. The court examined the nature of the claims, the procedural history, and the implications of the foreign legislation on the jurisdiction of the NSW courts.

Ultimately, the court held that the amendment to the statements of claim to include claims under the Wrongs Act of Papua New Guinea was not necessary. The court found that the plaintiffs' claims were statute-barred in Papua New Guinea, and therefore, the limitations legislation of that jurisdiction applied. The court concluded that the plaintiffs' claims were indeed barred and that the amendment was redundant. The court's decision effectively dismissed the plaintiffs' claims as they stood under the NSW Act.

No further orders were made beyond the dismissal of the claims as they were statute-barred under Papua New Guinea law. The court's decision underscored the importance of considering foreign limitations legislation when determining the viability of claims brought under domestic statutes.