Perry v Assured Concreting Services Pty Ltd - [2025] QSC 200

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

Perry v Assured Concreting Services Pty Ltd [2025] QSC 200

PARTIES:

LUKE PERRY

(applicant)

v
ASSURED CONCRETING SERVICES PTY LTD
ACN 162 005 398

(first respondent)

QLD TILT PANELS PTY LTD AS TRUSTEE FOR THE QLD TILT PANELS FAMILY TRUST
ACN 610 865 293
(second respondent)

EVANS BUILT PTY LTD
ACN 120 743 099
(third respondent)

FILE NO/S:

BS 1335/25

DIVISION:

Trial Division

PROCEEDING:

Application

ORIGINATING COURT:

Supreme Court of Queensland at Brisbane

DELIVERED ON:

22 August 2025

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

15 May 2025

JUDGE:

Treston J

ORDER:

1. Pursuant to s 31(2) of the Limitation of Actions Act 1974 (Qld) the limitation period in respect of the applicant’s claim for damages for personal injury arising on 23 August 2019 against the first respondent be extended until 17 June 2025.

2. The first respondent pay the applicant’s costs of this application on the standard basis.

CATCHWORDS:
LIMITATION OF ACTIONS – EXTENSION OR POSTPONEMENT OF LIMITATION PERIODS – EXTENSION OF TIME IN PERSONAL INJURIES MATTERS – KNOWLEDGE OF MATERIAL FACTS OF DECISIVE CHARACTER – GENERALLY – where the applicant suffered injuries at a worksite – where the applicant contends he became aware of the contractual relationships between relevant parties out of time – where the applicant applies to extend the limitation period – whether the applicant had knowledge of the contractual relationships between relevant parties within the limitation period – whether the contractual relationships between relevant parties constitutes a material fact of a decisive character – whether the applicant had taken all reasonable steps to find out the contractual relationships between the relevant parties before such information was disclosed to him – whether the extension of the limitation period should be granted
Limitation of Actions Act 1974 (Qld), ss 11, 30, 31,
Personal Injuries Proceedings Act 2002 (Qld), ss 9, 27, 43
Workers Compensation and Rehabilitation Act 2003 (Qld), s 279

BEK v BEL [2024] QCA 154
Brisbane South Regional Health Authority v Taylor (1996) 186 CLR 541
Dick v University of Queensland [2000] 2 Qd R 476
Harris v Evans Built Pty Ltd [2025] QSC 104
Moriarty v Sunbeam Corporation Limited [1988] 2 Qd R 325
Neilson v Peters Ship repair Pty Ltd [1983] 2 Qd R 419
NF v State of Queensland [2005] QCA 110
Queensland v Stephenson (2006) 226 CLR 197
Wolverson v Todman [2016] 2 Qd R 106

COUNSEL:
MJ Smith for the applicant

AC Harding for the first respondent

SOLICITORS:
L & H Injury Lawyers for the applicant

HBM Lawyers for the first respondent

The substantive application brought by the applicant in this proceeding is for an order that pursuant to s 31(2) of the Limitation of Actions Act 1974 (Qld) (LAA), the limitation period in respect of the applicant’s claim for damages for personal injuries arising on 23 August 2019 against the first respondent, be extended.
The applicant was injured in a workplace accident on a construction site which occurred on 23 August 2019, therefore the…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Perry v Assured Concreting Services Pty Ltd and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2025] QSC 200
Decision Date: 22 August 2025

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of Perry v Assured Concreting Services Pty Ltd, the applicant, Perry, suffered injuries at a worksite on 23 August 2019. He sought an extension of the limitation period to bring a claim for damages against Assured Concreting Services Pty Ltd, the first respondent, and others. The application came before the court to determine whether the extension should be granted, focusing on the applicant's knowledge of certain material facts and whether he took reasonable steps to uncover these facts within the original limitation period. The Queensland Court of Appeal was tasked with assessing the merits of the application under the provisions of the Limitation of Actions Act 1974 (Qld).

The central legal issues revolved around the applicant's knowledge of the contractual relationships between the relevant parties, specifically whether he had such knowledge within the limitation period. Additionally, the court considered whether these contractual relationships constituted a material fact of a decisive character. Furthermore, the court examined whether Perry had taken all reasonable steps to ascertain these relationships before they were disclosed to him. These issues were pivotal in determining the appropriateness of extending the limitation period under section 31(2) of the Limitation of Actions Act 1974 (Qld).

The court found that Perry did not have knowledge of the material facts regarding the contractual relationships between the relevant parties within the limitation period. It was determined that these relationships constituted a material fact of a decisive character, which Perry was not aware of until after the limitation period had expired. Moreover, the court accepted that Perry had taken all reasonable steps to uncover these facts before they were disclosed to him. Given these findings, the court concluded that an extension of the limitation period was warranted. Consequently, the limitation period was extended until 17 June 2025, and the first respondent was ordered to pay the applicant's costs of the application on the standard basis.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. Pursuant to s 31(2) of the Limitation of Actions Act 1974 (Qld) the limitation period in respect of the applicant’s claim for damages for personal injury arising on 23 August 2019 against the first respondent be extended until 17 June 2025.

2. The first respondent pay the applicant’s costs of this application on the standard basis.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.

CITATION:	Perry v Assured Concreting Services Pty Ltd [2025] QSC 200
PARTIES:	LUKE PERRY (applicant) v ASSURED CONCRETING SERVICES PTY LTD ACN 162 005 398 (first respondent) QLD TILT PANELS PTY LTD AS TRUSTEE FOR THE QLD TILT PANELS FAMILY TRUST ACN 610 865 293 (second respondent) EVANS BUILT PTY LTD ACN 120 743 099 (third respondent)
FILE NO/S:	BS 1335/25
DIVISION:	Trial Division
PROCEEDING:	Application
ORIGINATING COURT:	Supreme Court of Queensland at Brisbane
DELIVERED ON:	22 August 2025
DELIVERED AT:	Brisbane
HEARING DATE:	15 May 2025
JUDGE:	Treston J
ORDER:	1. Pursuant to s 31(2) of the *Limitation of Actions Act 1974* (Qld) the limitation period in respect of the applicant’s claim for damages for personal injury arising on 23 August 2019 against the first respondent be extended until 17 June 2025. 2. The first respondent pay the applicant’s costs of this application on the standard basis.
CATCHWORDS:	LIMITATION OF ACTIONS – EXTENSION OR POSTPONEMENT OF LIMITATION PERIODS – EXTENSION OF TIME IN PERSONAL INJURIES MATTERS – KNOWLEDGE OF MATERIAL FACTS OF DECISIVE CHARACTER – GENERALLY – where the applicant suffered injuries at a worksite – where the applicant contends he became aware of the contractual relationships between relevant parties out of time – where the applicant applies to extend the limitation period – whether the applicant had knowledge of the contractual relationships between relevant parties within the limitation period – whether the contractual relationships between relevant parties constitutes a material fact of a decisive character – whether the applicant had taken all reasonable steps to find out the contractual relationships between the relevant parties before such information was disclosed to him – whether the extension of the limitation period should be granted Limitation of Actions Act 1974 (Qld), ss 11, 30, 31, Personal Injuries Proceedings Act 2002 (Qld), ss 9, 27, 43 Workers Compensation and Rehabilitation Act 2003 (Qld), s 279 BEK v BEL [2024] QCA 154 Brisbane South Regional Health Authority v Taylor (1996) 186 CLR 541 Dick v University of Queensland [2000] 2 Qd R 476 Harris v Evans Built Pty Ltd [2025] QSC 104 Moriarty v Sunbeam Corporation Limited [1988] 2 Qd R 325 Neilson v Peters Ship repair Pty Ltd [1983] 2 Qd R 419 NF v State of Queensland [2005] QCA 110 Queensland v Stephenson (2006) 226 CLR 197 Wolverson v Todman [2016] 2 Qd R 106
COUNSEL:	MJ Smith for the applicant AC Harding for the first respondent
SOLICITORS:	L & H Injury Lawyers for the applicant HBM Lawyers for the first respondent