Mclaughlin v Burrows

In *Mclaughlin v Burrows*, the applicant sought leave to appeal a decision of the primary judge who had summarily dismissed the applicant's claims on the basis that they were statute-barred. The appeal concerned whether the primary judge erred in finding that there was no arguable case that the applicant was under a "disability" as defined by section 52(1) of the *Limitation Act 1969* (NSW).

The central legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether the applicant had an arguable case that a "disability" within the meaning of the *Limitation Act 1969* (NSW) prevented the limitation period from commencing or being extended. This required the court to consider the scope and application of section 52(1) of the Act in the context of the applicant's asserted circumstances.

The Court of Appeal, comprising Bell P and Meagher JA, dismissed the summons seeking leave to appeal and the notice of appeal. The court found that the primary judge had not erred in being satisfied that there was no arguable case that the applicant was under a relevant disability. Consequently, the applicant was ordered to pay the respondents' costs of the proceedings.