Sharma v Soar Aviation Aircraft Holdings Pty Ltd
Case
•
[2024] NSWDC 567
•29 November 2024
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Sharma v Soar Aviation Aircraft Holdings Pty Ltd [2024] NSWDC 567
[2024] NSWDC 567
29 November 2024
CaseChat Overview and Summary
Sharma and another brought an action against Soar Aviation Aircraft Holdings Pty Ltd and another, seeking damages for personal injury sustained by Sharma. The action was brought in the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The plaintiffs sought to join Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s of London as a party to the proceedings on the basis that they were the insurers of the second defendant, and that Sharma had an arguable case that the liability of the second defendant was covered by the policy held with the insurers. The plaintiffs also sought leave to amend their Statement of Claim to include an alternative claim in negligence against the first defendant, and to discontinue the claims against the first and second defendants. The defendants opposed the application.
The court was required to determine whether the plaintiffs had an arguable case against the insurers, and whether the proposed alternative claim in negligence was not futile. The court considered the evidence and submissions from both parties on the issue of whether the plaintiffs had an arguable case against the insurers, and whether the alternative claim in negligence was not futile. The court found that the plaintiffs had established an arguable case against the insurers, and that the alternative claim in negligence was not futile.
The court granted leave for the plaintiffs to join Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s of London as a party to the proceedings, and to discontinue the claims against the first and second defendants. The court also granted leave for the plaintiffs to amend their Statement of Claim to include an alternative claim in negligence against the first defendant. The court ordered that the costs of the application be costs in the cause. The plaintiffs were granted leave to file an Amended Statement of Claim which included the joinder of the insurers as a party, the discontinuance of the claims against the first and second defendants, and the alternative claim in negligence against the first defendant.
The court was required to determine whether the plaintiffs had an arguable case against the insurers, and whether the proposed alternative claim in negligence was not futile. The court considered the evidence and submissions from both parties on the issue of whether the plaintiffs had an arguable case against the insurers, and whether the alternative claim in negligence was not futile. The court found that the plaintiffs had established an arguable case against the insurers, and that the alternative claim in negligence was not futile.
The court granted leave for the plaintiffs to join Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s of London as a party to the proceedings, and to discontinue the claims against the first and second defendants. The court also granted leave for the plaintiffs to amend their Statement of Claim to include an alternative claim in negligence against the first defendant. The court ordered that the costs of the application be costs in the cause. The plaintiffs were granted leave to file an Amended Statement of Claim which included the joinder of the insurers as a party, the discontinuance of the claims against the first and second defendants, and the alternative claim in negligence against the first defendant.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Civil Litigation & Procedure
Legal Concepts
-
Jurisdiction
-
Standing
-
Discovery & Disclosure
-
Summary Judgment
-
Abuse of Process
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Cases Citing This Decision
0
Cases Cited
7
Statutory Material Cited
4
Agtrack (NT) Pty Ltd v Hatfield
[2005] HCA 38
Agtrack (NT) Pty Ltd v Hatfield
[2005] HCA 38
Avant Insurance Ltd v Burnie
[2021] NSWCA 272