Patterson v Baptist Union of Qld

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

Patterson v Baptist Union of Qld & Anor [2004] QCA 146

PARTIES:

KAY ANNETTE PATTERSON
(applicant/respondent)
v
THE BAPTIST UNION OF QUEENSLAND
(first respondent/applicant)
TIM HANNA (as representative of himself and all members of the Gateway Baptist Church as at 30 October 1999)
(second respondent/applicant)

FILE NO/S:

Appeal No 12018 of 2003
DC No 3652 of 2003

DIVISION:

Court of Appeal

PROCEEDING:

Application for leave s 118 DCA (Civil)

ORIGINATING COURT:

District Court at Brisbane

DELIVERED ON:

7 May 2004

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

4 March 2004

JUDGES:

McMurdo P, Williams JA and White J
Separate reasons for judgment of each member of the Court, Williams JA and White J concurring as to the orders made, McMurdo P dissenting

ORDERS:

1.   Grant leave to appeal

2.   Allow the appeal

3.   Set aside the order of the District Court of 28 November 2003, and in lieu thereof order the application of 31 October 2003 be dismissed

4.   Order that the respondent pay the applicants' costs of the appeal and of the application to be assessed

CATCHWORDS:

PROCEDURE – INFERIOR COURTS – QUEENSLAND –DISTRICT COURTS – CIVIL JURISDICTION – PRACTICE – PROCEDURE BEFORE TRIAL –COMMENCEMENT OF ACTION AND PLEADINGS – where respondent failed to commence action for personal injury in accordance with provisions of Personal Injuries Proceedings Act – where limitation period expired – where injury occurred prior to commencement of Act – where respondent did not give a 'complying notice of claim' before 18 June 2002 – where respondent applied for and was granted leave to commence proceedings under s 18(1)(c) and s 77D(2)(b) of the Act – whether such leave could be granted where 'complying notice of claim' given after 18 June 2002

Personal Injury Proceedings Act 2002 (Qld), s 18(1)(c), s 77A, 77D(2)

Cuthbert v Adams [2003] QSC 320; SC No 8237 of 2003, 22 September 2003, cited
Earthrowl v State of Queensland [2003] QDC 441; DC No 3663 of 2003, 8 December 2003, considered
Miller v Nominal Defendant [2003] QCA 558; Appeal No 4398 of 2003, 15 December 2003, cited
Mutze v Townsville City Council [2003] QDC 448; DC No 4178 of 2003, 11 December 2003, not followed
Willey v Lush Hair Salon [2003] QDC 444; DC No 3665 of 2003, 9 December 2003, considered

COUNSEL:

K N Wilson SC for the applicants
G D Beacham for the respondent

SOLICITORS:

H B M Lawyers for the applicants
Astills Lawyers for the respondent

McMURDO P: The respondent, a teacher at Redlands College, claims she was injured on 30 October 1999 at the Gateway Baptist Church, Wishart, when she was setting up for a Redlands College school show. She alleges that she tripped on an unmarked step causing her to injure her left foot and ankle. She consulted her solicitors about making a claim for damages on 3 January 2002 and first notified the applicants of her claim on 20 February 2002. The solicitors for the parties then corresponded…

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Court of Appeal, Patterson v Baptist Union of Queensland was heard. The dispute arose from an incident where the respondent suffered personal injury. The respondent sought to commence an action against the appellants in the District Court, but did not comply with the requirements of the Personal Injuries Proceedings Act 2002. Specifically, the respondent failed to give a 'complying notice of claim' before the 18 June 2002 deadline. Despite this, the respondent applied for and was granted leave to commence proceedings under sections 18(1)(c) and 77D(2)(b) of the Act. The appellants challenged this decision, arguing that leave could not be granted if the 'complying notice of claim' was given after the deadline.

The legal issues before the court were whether the District Court had the authority to grant leave under sections 18(1)(c) and 77D(2)(b) of the Act where the 'complying notice of claim' was not given within the statutory time limit. The court examined the legislative intent behind the Act and the procedural requirements established. It was necessary to determine whether the statutory provisions allowed for the granting of leave in such circumstances, and if the court's discretion under the Act was broad enough to permit an exception in this case.

The Court of Appeal held that the District Court did not have the authority to grant leave under sections 18(1)(c) and 77D(2)(b) if the 'complying notice of claim' was not given within the statutory time limit. The court found that the Act was clear in setting out the procedural requirements for commencing actions for personal injury, and that the statutory provisions did not provide for an exception in this case. The court's discretion under the Act was not broad enough to permit the granting of leave in this instance. Therefore, the Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, set aside the order of the District Court, and ordered that the respondent pay the appellants' costs of the appeal and the application.

Orders of the court

1. Grant leave to appeal

2. Allow the appeal

3. Set aside the order of the District Court of 28 November 2003, and in lieu thereof order the application of 31 October 2003 be dismissed

4. Order that the respondent pay the applicants' costs of the appeal and of the application to be assessed

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established

CITATION:	Patterson v Baptist Union of Qld & Anor [2004] QCA 146
PARTIES:	KAY ANNETTE PATTERSON (applicant/respondent) v THE BAPTIST UNION OF QUEENSLAND (first respondent/applicant) TIM HANNA (as representative of himself and all members of the Gateway Baptist Church as at 30 October 1999) (second respondent/applicant)
FILE NO/S:	Appeal No 12018 of 2003 DC No 3652 of 2003
DIVISION:	Court of Appeal
PROCEEDING:	Application for leave s 118 DCA (Civil)
ORIGINATING COURT:	District Court at Brisbane
DELIVERED ON:	7 May 2004
DELIVERED AT:	Brisbane
HEARING DATE:	4 March 2004
JUDGES:	McMurdo P, Williams JA and White J Separate reasons for judgment of each member of the Court, Williams JA and White J concurring as to the orders made, McMurdo P dissenting
ORDERS:	1. Grant leave to appeal 2. Allow the appeal 3. Set aside the order of the District Court of 28 November 2003, and in lieu thereof order the application of 31 October 2003 be dismissed 4. Order that the respondent pay the applicants' costs of the appeal and of the application to be assessed
CATCHWORDS:	PROCEDURE – INFERIOR COURTS – QUEENSLAND –DISTRICT COURTS – CIVIL JURISDICTION – PRACTICE – PROCEDURE BEFORE TRIAL –COMMENCEMENT OF ACTION AND PLEADINGS – where respondent failed to commence action for personal injury in accordance with provisions of Personal Injuries Proceedings Act – where limitation period expired – where injury occurred prior to commencement of Act – where respondent did not give a 'complying notice of claim' before 18 June 2002 – where respondent applied for and was granted leave to commence proceedings under s 18(1)(c) and s 77D(2)(b) of the Act – whether such leave could be granted where 'complying notice of claim' given after 18 June 2002 Personal Injury Proceedings Act 2002 (Qld), s 18(1)(c), s 77A, 77D(2) Cuthbert v Adams [2003] QSC 320; SC No 8237 of 2003, 22 September 2003, cited Earthrowl v State of Queensland [2003] QDC 441; DC No 3663 of 2003, 8 December 2003, considered Miller v Nominal Defendant [2003] QCA 558; Appeal No 4398 of 2003, 15 December 2003, cited Mutze v Townsville City Council [2003] QDC 448; DC No 4178 of 2003, 11 December 2003, not followed Willey v Lush Hair Salon [2003] QDC 444; DC No 3665 of 2003, 9 December 2003, considered
COUNSEL:	K N Wilson SC for the applicants G D Beacham for the respondent
SOLICITORS:	H B M Lawyers for the applicants Astills Lawyers for the respondent