Laws v Web Scaffolding

The appeal in *Laws v Web Scaffolding* concerned an application for an extension of time to commence proceedings for personal injury. The plaintiff sought to extend the limitation period after it had expired, leading to the initial striking out of their proceedings by the Master. The primary judge had subsequently upheld this decision.

The central legal issue before the appellate court was whether the plaintiff had discharged the onus of demonstrating that it was just and reasonable to grant an extension of time for their personal injury claim. A related issue was the extent to which the defendant bore an evidential onus to establish actual prejudice if they wished to rely on such prejudice as a ground to resist the extension.

The court reasoned that the onus rests on the plaintiff to establish that it is just and reasonable to extend the time for commencing proceedings. However, if the defendant wishes to rely on actual prejudice, they bear the evidential onus of establishing that prejudice. In this instance, the court found that the plaintiff had met the necessary threshold, and the primary judge had erred in upholding the Master's decision to strike out the proceedings.

Consequently, the appellate court set aside the decision of the primary judge and restored the Master's decision of 5 June 2009, including the order as to costs. The defendant was ordered to pay the plaintiff’s costs of the appeal to the primary judge and to the appellate court.