Kapoor v Randwick Municipal Council

[2006] HCATrans 191

[2006] HCATrans 191

IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Office of the Registry
  Sydney  No S534 of 2005

B e t w e e n -

OM PRAKASH KAPOOR

Applicant

and

RANDWICK MUNICIPAL COUNCIL

Respondent

Application for special leave to appeal

Publication of reasons and pronouncement of orders

GUMMOW J
HEYDON J

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

AT CANBERRA ON WEDNESDAY, 12 APRIL 2006, AT 9.43 AM

Copyright in the High Court of Australia

GUMMOW J:   The applicant claims to have been badly injured at work on 11 October 1973.  On 17 September 1992, the New South Wales Compensation Court (Commissioner Grayson) determined that the applicant had suffered only a limited injury to his right shoulder.  On 1 February 2002, the applicant began proceedings in the Supreme Court of New South Wales.  The defendant/employer pleaded that the limitation period had expired on 10 October 1979.  On 7 July 2004, Master Malpass refused to grant an extension of the limitation period for various reasons, including the applicant’s failure to explain the delay in instituting the proceedings and the fact that the delay had caused actual and presumptive prejudice. 

On 1 April 2005, Hulme J dismissed an appeal brought to him against the Master’s orders:  the appeal should have been brought to the Court of Appeal.  On 1 August 2005, Registrar Schell dismissed the applicant’s application to extend the time within which to appeal against the orders of the Master and Hulme J.  On 12 September 2005, Beazley JA dismissed challenges by the applicant to the decisions of Commissioner Grayson, Master Malpass, Hulme J and Registrar Schell. 

The applicant’s application for special leave to appeal against the orders of Beazley JA should be dismissed.  The only error made in the courts below was an error by Master Malpass, who used the wrong numbers in referring to provisions of the Limitation Act 1969 (NSW); but he has not been shown to have erred in substance. The application raises no point of law. It also makes scandalous and vexatious allegations against the Master and the Registrar.

Pursuant to r 41.10.5 we direct the Registrar to draw up, sign and seal an order dismissing the application.  I publish the disposition signed by Heydon J and myself.

AT 9.45 AM THE MATTER WAS CONCLUDED