Legal Research
Cases
Ruby v Doric Constructions (Australia) Pty Ltd

Ruby v Doric Constructions (Australia) Pty Ltd

Case [2013] WASCA 94 9 April 2013

Civil Litigation & Procedure

No judgment structure available for this case.

Type to search within this case.

RUBY -v- DORIC CONSTRUCTIONS (AUSTRALIA) PTY LTD [2013] WASCA 94

Jurisdiction:	SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA	Citation No:	[2013] WASCA 94
Court:	THE COURT OF APPEAL (WA)
Case No:	CACV:36/2012	Heard:	28 NOVEMBER 2012
Coram:	PULLIN JA NEWNES JA MURPHY JA	Delivered:	9/04/13
No of pages:	14	Judgment Part:	1 of 1
Result:	Appeal allowed Case to be removed from Inactive Cases List
Category:	A
PDF Version

Parties:	RODNEY MARK RUBY DORIC CONSTRUCTIONS (AUSTRALIA) PTY LTD STL ENGINEERING PTY LTD
Catchwords:	Practice and procedure District Court Inactive Cases List District Court Rules 2005 (WA), pt 4 subdiv 3(6) Case on Inactive Cases List under r 44(2) for failure to comply with Standard timetable Taken to be dismissed under r 44G(1) No order making Standard timetable applicable to case Case not inactive under r 44(2) Rule 44G(1) did not operate to dismiss case
Legislation:	District Court Rules 2005 (WA), r 30, r 31, r 32, r 33, r 37, r 38, r 44, r 44A, r 44D, r 44G
Case References:	ICM Agriculture Pty Ltd v Commonwealth of Australia [2009] HCA 51; (2009) 240 CLR 140 Rowe v Stoltze [2013] WASCA 92 Ruby v Doric Group Holdings Pty Ltd [2012] WADC 58

JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA TITLE OF COURT : THE COURT OF APPEAL (WA) CITATION : RUBY -v- DORIC CONSTRUCTIONS (AUSTRALIA) PTY LTD [2013] WASCA 94 CORAM : PULLIN JA

NEWNES JA

MURPHY JA

HEARD : 28 NOVEMBER 2012 DELIVERED : 9 APRIL 2013 FILE NO/S : CACV 36 of 2012 BETWEEN : RODNEY MARK RUBY

Appellant

AND

DORIC CONSTRUCTIONS (AUSTRALIA) PTY LTD

First Respondent

STL ENGINEERING PTY LTD

Second Respondent

ON APPEAL FROM:

Jurisdiction : DISTRICT COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Coram : COMMISSIONER GETHING

Citation : RUBY -v- DORIC GROUP HOLDINGS PTY LTD [2012] WADC 58

File No : CIV 3670 of 2010

(Page 2)

Catchwords:

Practice and procedure - District Court - Inactive Cases List - District Court Rules 2005 (WA), pt 4 subdiv 3(6) - Case on Inactive Cases List under r 44(2) for failure to comply with Standard timetable - Taken to be dismissed under r 44G(1) - No order making Standard timetable applicable to case - Case not inactive under r 44(2) - Rule 44G(1) did not operate to dismiss case

Legislation:

District Court Rules 2005 (WA),r 30, r 31, r 32, r 33, r 37, r 38, r 44, r 44A, r 44D, r 44G

Result:

Appeal allowed

Case to be removed from Inactive Cases List

Category: A

Representation:

Counsel:

Appellant : Mr B W Ashdown

First Respondent : Ms C H Thompson

Second Respondent : Ms C H Thompson

Intervenor : Mr R M Mitchell SC & Mr A K Sharpe

Solicitors:

Appellant : Bradford & Co

First Respondent : Jarman McKenna

Second Respondent : Tottle Partners

Intervenor : State Solicitor for Western Australia

(Page 3)

Case(s) referred to in judgment(s):

ICM Agriculture Pty Ltd v Commonwealth of Australia [2009] HCA 51; (2009) 240 CLR 140
Rowe…

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.

Continue reading Ruby v Doric Constructions (Australia) Pty Ltd

Details

AGLC: RUBY -v- DORIC CONSTRUCTIONS (AUSTRALIA) PTY LTD [2013] WASCA 94
Case: [2013] WASCA 94
Decision Date: 9 APRIL 2013

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Ruby commenced proceedings against Doric Constructions in the District Court seeking damages for personal injuries sustained in a workplace accident. The case was listed on the Inactive Cases List as it had failed to comply with the Standard timetable. Ruby appealed the listing, arguing that the case was not properly dismissed and should not have been placed on the Inactive Cases List. The central legal issue in this case was whether the District Court had correctly applied the District Court Rules 2005 (WA) in removing the case from the active list and listing it as inactive.

The court examined the relevant provisions of the District Court Rules 2005 (WA), specifically rule 44(2) which defines an inactive case and rule 44G(1) which provides for the dismissal of cases on the Inactive Cases List. The court found that while the case was initially placed on the Inactive Cases List due to non-compliance with the Standard timetable, rule 44G(1) did not automatically operate to dismiss the case. The court also noted that the case had not been made inactive under rule 44(2) as no order had been made to render the Standard timetable applicable to the case. Consequently, the court concluded that the case should not have been listed as inactive and allowed the appeal. The case was ordered to be removed from the Inactive Cases List.

Orders

Orders of the court

Appeal allowed

Case to be removed from Inactive Cases List

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.

Citations

AGLC Citation

RUBY -v- DORIC CONSTRUCTIONS (AUSTRALIA) PTY LTD [2013] WASCA 94

Most Recent Citation

Gransch v Walker [2014] WASC 178

Cases citing this decision · 12 of 12 shown

KLM (a pseudonym) v Foley
[2025] WADC 83

…of Stirling [2020] WADC 41 Hazart Pty Ltd v Rademaker (1993) 11 WAR 26 Rowe v Stoltze [2013] WASCA 92 Ruby v Doric Constructions (Australia) Pty Ltd [2013] WASCA 94 Sovereign Grange Pty Ltd v A V Truck Services Pty Ltd [No 2] [2017] WASCA 142 Stewart v Hames [2019] WASCA 127…
Guillaume v City of Stirling
[2020] WADC 41 Para 1

…s, regardless of how that has come about.[42] [41] Rowe v Stoltze (2013) 45 WAR 116 ( Rowe ). See also Ruby v Doric Constructions (Australia) Pty Ltd (2013) 45 WAR 131 ( Ruby ). [42] Rowe (123) [25] (Newnes JA).…
Wilson v Saleam
[2019] WADC 127 Para 7

…Reference has been made in the submissions filed to the cases of Ruby v Doric Constructions (Australia) Pty Ltd [2013] WASCA 94 and Rowe v Stoltze [2013] WASCA 92. Each of those cases was an appeal against Commissioner Gething sitting in the District Court of Western Australia and they identified certain procedura…
Hemmett v Market Direct Group Pty Ltd [No 2]
[2018] WASC 310 Para 7

…of general application.[33] I accept this may provide sufficient reason to grant the certificate.[34] [32] Ruby v Doric Constructions (Aust) Pty Ltd [2013] WASCA 94 (S) [16]. [33] Ruby v Doric Constructions (Aust) Pty Ltd [17]. [34] Ruby v Doric Constructions (Aust) Pty Ltd [17].…
Elwood v Goodman
[2014] WADC 143

…Jeruth Pty Ltd v Haybale Pty Ltd [2004] VSC 319 Musolino v Osmond [1996] SADC 3526 Ruby v Doric Constructions (Australia) Pty Ltd [2013] WASCA 94 The Owners of Riviera Apartments (Strata Plan 35851) v Wembley Lakes Estate Pty Ltd [2009] WASC 37…
Gransch v Walker
[2014] WASC 178 Para 6

…ees Union (NSW) (1908) 6 CLR 469, 590. [27] ICM Agriculture v Commonwealth (2009) 240 CLR 140 [141]; Ruby v Doric Constructions (Australia) Pty Ltd [2013] WASCA 94; (2013) 45 WAR 131 [33].…
O'Dea v Shire of Coolgardie
[2013] WADC 150

…; (2010) 28 VR 250 Rankilor v Circuit Travel Pty Ltd [2013] WASCA 148 Regan v Gibson [2010] WADC 144 Ruby v Doric Constructions (Australia) Pty Ltd [2013] WASCA 94 Ruby v Marsh (1975) 132 CLR 642 Starrs v Retravision (WA) Ltd [2012] WASCA 67 Tey v Optima Financial Group Pty Ltd [2010] WASCA 219 Tey v Optima Financ…
Rowe and Anor v Stoltze and Anor
[2013] HCATrans 221

…o bring the proceedings to an end and that is what the Court of Appeal did in a case heard at the same time as at present, Ruby v Doric Constructions [2013] WASCA 94, which is behind tab 3 and there the Court of Appeal held that in fact the provisions had not been engaged and the case was not in fact deemed to be…
Strzelecki Holdings Pty Ltd v Jorgensen
[2013] WADC 121

…5 Rules of the Supreme Court 1971 Case References: Murcia & Associates (a firm) v Grey [2001] WASCA 240; (2001) 25 WAR 209 Ruby v Doric Constructions [2013] WASCA 94 Strzelecki Holdings Pty Ltd v Wiebel [2013] WADC 27 JURISDICTION : DISTRICT COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA IN CIVIL LOCATION : PERTH CITATION : STRZELECK…
Rekabe v Foxline Logistics
[2013] WADC 104

…273 O'Brien v Komesaroff [1982] HCA 33; (1982) 150 CLR 310 Rankilor v Circuit Travel [2013] WASCA 148 Ruby v Doric Constructions (Australia) Pty Ltd [2013] WASCA 94 Scope Investigation Services Pty Ltd v Kelly CM65/99 Smith v McCusker QC [2010] WASCA 55 SNF (Australia) Pty Ltd v Jones [2008] WASCA 121 Stead v Sta…
Ruby v Doric Constructions (Australia) Pty Ltd
[2013] WASCA 94 (S)

…RUBY -v- DORIC CONSTRUCTIONS (AUSTRALIA) PTY LTD [2013] WASCA 94 (S)…
Reynolds v The State of Western Australia
[2013] WADC 67

…d v Naso [1999] WASCA 80 Prescott v Bulldog Tools Ltd [1981] 3 All ER 869 Re Monger; Ex Parte Dutch [2001] WASCA 220; (2001) 25 WAR 92 Rowe v Stoltze [2013] WASCA 94 Scott v Commercial Hotel Merbein Pty Ltd [1930] VLR 25 Stace v Commonwealth of Australia (1989) 51 SASR 391 Starr v National Coal Board [1977] 1 All…

View all 12 citing cases →

Cases cited in this decision · 3 of 3 shown

Rowe v Stoltze
[2013] WASCA 92

…ICM Agriculture Pty Ltd v Commonwealth of Australia [2009] HCA 51; (2009) 240 CLR 140 Rowe v Stoltze [2013] WASCA 92 Ruby v Doric Group Holdings Pty Ltd [2012] WADC 58…
Ruby v Doric Group Holdings Pty Ltd
[2012] WADC 58

…Agriculture Pty Ltd v Commonwealth of Australia [2009] HCA 51; (2009) 240 CLR 140 Rowe v Stoltze [2013] WASCA 92 Ruby v Doric Group Holdings Pty Ltd [2012] WADC 58…
ICM Agriculture Pty Ltd v The Commonwealth
[2009] HCA 51

…ICM Agriculture Pty Ltd v Commonwealth of Australia [2009] HCA 51; (2009) 240 CLR 140 Rowe v Stoltze [2013] WASCA 92 Ruby v Doric Group Holdings Pty Ltd [2012] WADC 58…

Legislation cited in this decision · 4

District Court Rules 2005 (WA)
30 3 mentions
Constitution of Australia (Cth)
1 mention
District Court of Western Australia Act 1969 (WA)
1 mention
Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth)
1 mention