J v O

Case [2023] NSWDC 360


District Court


New South Wales

  • Amendment notes
Medium Neutral Citation: J v O [2023] NSWDC 360
Hearing dates: 06 September 2023
Date of orders: 06 September 2023
Decision date: 06 September 2023
Jurisdiction:Civil
Before: Gibson DCJ
Decision:

(1) By reason of the insufficient notice given to the defendant of the hearing of these proceedings and for service of medical reports, as well by reason of UCPR rr 7.17 and 7.18, the hearing of the assessment of damages is vacated with costs reserved.

(2)   Stand these proceedings over to 27 October 2023 before the List Judge to enable the plaintiff to bring such application for orders as may be recommended by her legal representatives.

(3)   A copy of this decision will be provided to the permanent List Judges in this Court and to the defendant.

(4)   The Court books to remain with the file.

Catchwords:

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – defendant suffering comprehension problems requiring the appointment of a tutor – attempt by plaintiff to have a tutor appointed by NCAT unsuccessful – plaintiff obtains default judgment and lists proceedings for assessment of damages – defendant not notified of date of hearing or served with updated medical reports until the day beforehand – hearing date vacated pursuant to UCPR r 29.7 – consideration of UCPR r 7.17 and r 7.18

Legislation Cited:

Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW), s 67

Guardianship Act 1987 (NSW), s 9(1)(d)

Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW), rr 7.17, 7.18, 29.7

Cases Cited:

Deputy Commissioner of Taxation v P (1987) 11 NSWLR 200

Facer v Wolfe [2013] NSWDC 231

Iskandar v Mahbur [2011] NSWSC 1056

Michaletos v Stivactas [1992] ANZ ConvR 90

Texts Cited:

Nil

Category:Procedural rulings
Parties: J (Plaintiff)
O (Defendant) (no appearance)
Representation:

Counsel:
Mr Del Monte (Plaintiff)

Solicitors:
Karp O’Neill Lawyers (Plaintiff)
File Number(s): 2021/00362928
Publication restriction: Suppression of the parties' details

Judgment (EX TEMPORE)

  1. HER HONOUR: These proceedings are listed for hearing today for assessment of damages.

  2. The plaintiff, by statement of claim filed on 22 December 2021, brought proceedings against the defendant for sexual assaults which occurred in or about 1974 and which were the subject of criminal convictions at the time.

  3. The defendant was served with the statement of claim. A statement of particulars was also served, and I have seen from the list of documents attached to it that certain medical evidence was also included, including a report from a psychiatrist which was current at the time.

  4. Shortly after these proceedings were commenced, the defendant consulted a solicitor in Taree, where he resided, who provided him with some assistance including representation. It rapidly became apparent to all concerned that the defendant required some form of assistance in the form of a tutor, and very extensive case management of this issue took place before the Judicial Registrar. For example, the plaintiff's former solicitors allowed an extension of time for the defendant to submit an application with the New South Wales Trustee and Guardian, the Judicial Registrar noting that he had…

Continue reading J v O

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
J v O [2023] NSWDC 360
Case
[2023] NSWDC 360
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of J v O involved the plaintiff seeking to have damages assessed against the defendant, who had previously obtained a default judgment due to the defendant's comprehension issues. The matter was before the Local Court of New South Wales. The plaintiff had previously attempted to have a tutor appointed by the New South Wales Civil and Administrative Tribunal (NCAT) to assist the defendant but was unsuccessful. The plaintiff listed the proceedings for an assessment of damages without providing the defendant with adequate notice or updated medical reports. The defendant was only notified of the hearing date and served with the reports the day before the hearing.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the insufficient notice provided to the defendant and the late service of medical reports complied with the requirements of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW) (UCPR). Specifically, the court needed to consider UCPR r 7.17, which outlines the requirement for proper service of documents, and UCPR r 7.18, which deals with the timeliness of service. The court had to determine if the failure to provide adequate notice and service of documents justified vacating the hearing and whether it was just to proceed with the assessment of damages under the circumstances.

The court found that the notice provided to the defendant was insufficient and that the service of the medical reports was untimely, thereby contravening UCPR r 7.17 and r 7.18. The court concluded that it was not just to proceed with the assessment of damages given the procedural errors. Consequently, the hearing of the assessment of damages was vacated, and the proceedings were stood over to a later date to allow the plaintiff to bring appropriate applications, as recommended by her legal representatives. The court also reserved costs, ordered the proceedings to be listed before the List Judge, and directed that a copy of the decision be provided to the relevant parties.

Orders

Orders of the court

(1) By reason of the insufficient notice given to the defendant of the hearing of these proceedings and for service of medical reports, as well by reason of UCPR rr 7.17 and 7.18, the hearing of the assessment of damages is vacated with costs reserved.

(2) Stand these proceedings over to 27 October 2023 before the List Judge to enable the plaintiff to bring such application for orders as may be recommended by her legal representatives.

(3) A copy of this decision will be provided to the permanent List Judges in this Court and to the defendant.

(4) The Court books to remain with the file.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.