Hunter v Hanson

In *Hunter v Hanson*, the applicant sought leave to appeal a decision of the primary judge who had granted the respondent leave to serve a statement of claim out of time. The respondent had filed the statement of claim, which included defamation causes of action, shortly before the limitation period expired. However, service was not effected within the time prescribed by UCPR 6.2(4)(b)(ii). The respondent elected to delay service pending the outcome of an appeal concerning a defence of absolute privilege, and also to avoid exacerbating an already difficult situation with the applicant, in relation to whom an apprehended violence order had been sought.

The central legal issues before the Court of Appeal were whether the primary judge had erred in exercising her discretion to extend the time for service. Specifically, the court considered whether there were "good reasons" for the delay in service, whether the respondent's knowledge of sufficient facts to plead the statement of claim was determinative against granting an extension, and the effect of the expiry of the limitation period on an application for an extension of time for service.

The Court of Appeal held that the primary judge had not erred in her exercise of discretion. The court reasoned that the respondent's strategic decision to await the outcome of the appeal regarding absolute privilege was a valid consideration, as was the desire to avoid further conflict with the applicant. The court affirmed that the existence of a potential defence does not preclude an extension of time for service, and that the expiry of the limitation period does not automatically bar such an application. The court found that the primary judge had properly weighed all relevant factors in reaching her decision.

The application for leave to appeal was dismissed with costs.