Hornby v The Nominal Defendant

In *Hornby v The Nominal Defendant*, the Court of Appeal of New South Wales considered an appeal concerning the extension of a limitation period. The claimant sought to extend the time within which to bring a claim against the Nominal Defendant, who is the insurer of an unidentified or uninsured motor vehicle. The primary judge had refused to grant an extension, and the claimant appealed this decision.

The central legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether it was just and reasonable to extend the limitation period for the claimant's cause of action, pursuant to section 60G(2) of the *Limitation Act 1969* (NSW). This required the court to weigh the claimant's reasons for the delay against any significant actual or presumptive prejudice suffered by the Nominal Defendant, considering the timing of that prejudice in relation to the expiry of the original limitation period.

The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, setting aside the primary judge's orders. The court reasoned that the prejudice to the Nominal Defendant, particularly that which arose before the expiry of the limitation period, was not of such a magnitude as to outweigh the claimant's entitlement to have her claim heard. The court applied the principles of section 60G(2) of the *Limitation Act 1969*, finding that it was just and reasonable to extend the limitation period. Consequently, the court ordered that the limitation period for the claimant's cause of action be extended to the date of filing of her Statement of Claim.