Faris v Faris; Faris v Sims

The proceedings before Elkaim J concerned applications for leave to appeal from an interlocutory judgment in two separate motor vehicle accident claims brought by the same plaintiff, Ms Faris, against two different defendants, Mr Faris and Mr Sims. The plaintiff alleged overlapping injuries arising from the two accidents, and the primary judge had ordered that the proceedings be consolidated. The applications for leave to appeal sought to challenge this consolidation order.

The central legal issue before Elkaim J was whether leave to appeal should be granted from the interlocutory order consolidating the two actions. This required consideration of whether the appeal had a real prospect of success or whether it was otherwise in the interests of justice to grant leave, particularly in light of the potential admission of fresh evidence.

Elkaim J refused the applications for leave to appeal. His Honour reasoned that the primary judge had correctly exercised their discretion in consolidating the proceedings. The court found that consolidation was appropriate given the overlapping nature of the alleged injuries and the potential for significant cost savings and avoidance of inconsistent findings. The proposed fresh evidence was not considered to be of such a nature as to warrant a different outcome, and the applications were ultimately determined to lack a real prospect of success and not be in the interests of justice.

The applications for leave to appeal were therefore dismissed.