Parsons v Doukas

[2001] NSWCA 128

NSW Court of Appeal

View on CaseLaw

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Limitation of Actions
2. › Motor vehicle accidents
3. › Leave to commence proceedings out of time
4. › Discretion to grant leave
5. › Scope of discretion
6. › Factors to be considered
7. › Whether absence of significant prejudice to defendant requires grant of leave
8. › Whether delay alone sufficient ground for refusal
9. › Motor Accidents Act 1988 (NSW), s 52(4)
1. Limitation of Actions
2. › Extension of time
3. › Onus on applicant
4. › Whether applicant must demonstrate case is justifiable exception to limitation period
5. › Relationship between presumptive and actual prejudice
1. Appeal
2. › Discretionary decisions
3. › Whether trial judge erred in exercise of discretion
4. › Scope of appellate review

Quick Take

The absence of significant prejudice to a proposed defendant does not require the court to grant leave to commence proceedings out of time under s 52(4) of the Motor Accidents Act 1988 (NSW). The discretion is a discretion to grant leave, not to refuse it, and the applicant bears the ultimate onus of demonstrating that the case is a justifiable exception to the limitation period. Long and unexplained delay, particularly after the applicant received proper legal advice about time limits, may justify refusal of leave even where a fair trial remains possible.