King v Griffiths

The proceedings in King v Griffiths were before the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The plaintiffs, King, sought damages from Griffiths, who acted as their solicitors in a prior proceeding with a neighbour in the Land and Environment Court. The plaintiffs alleged that Griffiths had negligently advised them in the earlier proceedings. The court was required to determine whether it should separate the trial of issues of liability from the assessment of damages, as well as whether to separate the question of the defendants' advocate's defence of immunity from suit.

The court considered the principles governing applications to separate questions of liability and damages. It noted that such applications are not to be made lightly and that there must be a compelling reason to justify separation. The court also examined whether the principles had changed after the introduction of the Civil Procedure Act 2005. Given that the credit issues overlapped between the proposed liability and damages hearings, and the facts on which the liability question was to be determined were not agreed, the court found that there was no compelling reason to separate the issues. Consequently, the motion was dismissed.

No final orders were made in this decision, as the motion to separate the trial of issues was dismissed. The case will proceed with the trial of both liability and damages together. The plaintiffs will need to present their case in full, including evidence of negligence and the resulting damages, in one proceeding.