Young v Roads and Maritime Services

Court of Appeal

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation:	Young v Roads and Maritime Services [2015] NSWCA 2
Hearing dates:	2 February 2015
Decision date:	02 February 2015
Before:	Leeming JA
Decision:	1. Dismiss the notice of motion filed 29 January 2015. 2. Reserve the costs of that notice of motion.
Catchwords:	PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – expedition – application for expedition of leave application – no utility in granting expedition – application dismissed.
Cases Cited:	Young v Roads and Maritime Services [2014] NSWSC 1104
Category:	Procedural and other rulings
Parties:	Maureen Mary Young (Applicant) Roads and Maritime Services (First Respondent) State of New South Wales (Second Respondent)
Representation:	Counsel: Applicant in person P Lane (First Respondent) Solicitors: Crown Solicitor (First Respondent)
File Number(s):	2014/339704
Decision under appeal	Court or tribunal: Supreme Court of New South Wales Date of Decision: 29 October 2014 Before: Hidden J File Number(s): 2014/198018

EX TEMPORE JUDGMENT

1. LEEMING JA:  Before me is Ms Young’s notice of motion seeking expedition of her application for leave to appeal from the interlocutory judgment of Hidden J given on 29 October 2014, dismissing Ms Young’s notice of motion itself seeking expedition filed 20 October 2014. The procedural history of this litigation is not free from complexity. Parts were summarised, expressly incompletely, by Garling J in Young v Roads and Maritime Services [2014] NSWSC 1104. What follows, likewise, will not be comprehensive, but it will be sufficient in order to resolve the application before me.

2. Ms Young is a defendant to proceedings brought by Roads and Maritime Services (RMS) in the Local Court. She has filed a defence and cross-claim. By summons filed on 4 July 2014, Ms Young commenced proceedings in this Court whose substance was to transfer the proceedings in the Local Court to this Court. His Honour Hidden J recorded that Ms Young’s transfer application had been case managed and fixed for hearing on 19 February 2015, and had come before a number of judges and registrars in the Common Law Division. She sought its expedition.

3. It is not necessary to reproduce the whole of Hidden J’s short reasons, sitting as a Duty Judge in the Common Law Division. His Honour referred to the relatively lengthy history of the matter, the fact that expedition involves a disruption of the business of a very busy court, that lists were already heavily committed, particularly in the last seven weeks of the Court’s term, and that the application to transfer seemed likely to take “some little time”. His Honour said, and Ms Young has relied upon this in support of her application, that Ms Young’s prospect of recovering damages was “no more than speculative”, but added, “There is no doubt great benefit to [Ms Young] to have them heard as soon as possible so that if damages are awarded the plaintiff can have the benefit of them as soon as possible”.

4. In oral submissions, Ms Young has drawn attention to three respects with which she…