This decision has been amended. Please see the end of the decision for a list of the amendments.
Court of Appeal
New South Wales
Case Title: Taylor v Owners - Strata Plan No 11564 Medium Neutral Citation: [2013] NSWCA 55 Hearing Date(s): 6 December 2012 Decision Date: 18 March 2013 Before: McColl JA at [1];
Basten JA at [46];
Hoeben JA at [98]Decision: 1. Grant leave to appeal.
2. Direct the appellant to file a notice of appeal in the form of the draft in the White Book within seven days.
3. Appeal dismissed
4. Appellant to pay the first-fourth and sixth respondents' costs of the application for leave to appeal and of the appeal.
[Note: The Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 provide (Rule 36.11) that unless the Court otherwise orders, a judgment or order is taken to be entered when it is recorded in the Court's computerised court record system. Setting aside and variation of judgments or orders is dealt with by Rules 36.15, 36.16, 36.17 and 36.18. Parties should in particular note the time limit of fourteen days in Rule 36.16.]
Catchwords: DAMAGES - claims under the Compensation to Relatives Act 1897 (NSW) - limit on the "claimant's" income to which a court may have regard when calculating future loss of economic support - whether limit applies to claims under the Compensation to Relatives Act - whether deceased person is a "claimant" - whether appropriate for court to insert words not used by the Parliament - Civil Liability Act 2002 (NSW), s 12
STATUTORY INTERPRETATION - principles - whether words may be read into a provision to qualify the literal meaning - proper scope of a purposive construction
WORDS & PHRASES - "claimant" - "relate to"Legislation Cited: Civil Liability Act 2002 (NSW), ss 3, 3B, 5T, 8, 9, 10, 11, 11A, 12, 13, 14, 15, 15B, 16, 18, 19; Part 2
Civil Liability Amendment (Personal Responsibility) Act 2002 (NSW)
The Common Law Practice Acts 1867 to 1940, s 12
Compensation to Relatives Act 1897 (NSW), ss 3, 4, 6B
Health Care Liability Act 2001 (NSW), s 9
Evidence Act 1995 (NSW), ss 104, 106
Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1944 (NSW), s 2
Interpretation Act 1987 (NSW), ss 33, 34
Motor Accidents Compensation Act 1999 (NSW), s 125
Penalties and Sentences Act 1985 (Vic), s 77
The Railways Acts 1914 to 1955 (Qld), s 121
Supreme Court Act 1979 (NSW), s 101
Transport Accident Act 1986 (Vic), s 93
Workers Compensation Act 1987 (NSW), s 151A, 151ICases Cited: Alcan (NT Alumina) Pty Ltd v Commissioner of Territory Revenue (NT) [2009] HCA 41; 239 CLR 27
Bermingham v Corrective Services Commission of New South Wales (1988) 15 NSWLR 292
Carr v Western Australia [2007] HCA 47; 232 CLR 138
Certain Lloyd's Underwriters Subscribing to Contract No IH00AAQS v Cross; Certain Lloyd's Underwriters Subscribing to Contract No IH00AAQS v Thelander [2012] HCA 56; 293 ALR 412
Cooper Brookes (Wollongong) Pty Ltd v Commissioner…
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read Taylor v Owners - Strata Plan No 11564 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
One click creates your free account or signs you in.
By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.
- Case
- [2013] NSWCA 55
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether section 12 of the *Civil Liability Act 2002* (NSW), which imposes a limit on the income of a "claimant" that can be considered when assessing future economic loss, applied to claims brought under the *Compensation to Relatives Act 1897*. This required the Court to determine whether the deceased person, in the context of a claim for loss of dependency, could be considered a "claimant" for the purposes of section 12.
The Court of Appeal held that the deceased person was not a "claimant" within the meaning of section 12 of the *Civil Liability Act 2002*. The Court reasoned that the term "claimant" in section 12 referred to the person making the claim, which in this instance were the dependants, not the deceased. To interpret "claimant" as referring to the deceased would require the Court to insert words into the statute that Parliament had not used, which is contrary to established principles of statutory interpretation. The Court affirmed that a purposive construction of the *Civil Liability Act 2002* did not support such an interpretation, and that the *Compensation to Relatives Act 1897* operated independently in this regard.
The Court of Appeal granted leave to appeal but ultimately dismissed the appeal, ordering the appellant to pay the respondents' costs.
Orders
Orders of the court
1. Grant leave to appeal.
2. Direct the appellant to file a notice of appeal in the form of the draft in the White Book within seven days.
3. Appeal dismissed
4. Appellant to pay the first-fourth and sixth respondents' costs of the application for leave to appeal and of the appeal.
[Note: The Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 provide (Rule 36.11) that unless the Court otherwise orders, a judgment or order is taken to be entered when it is recorded in the Court's computerised court record system. Setting aside and variation of judgments or orders is dealt with by Rules 36.15, 36.16, 36.17 and 36.18. Parties should in particular note the time limit of fourteen days in Rule 36.16.]
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.