In cross-vesting applications involving personal injury claims where the place of the tort and the plaintiff's residence coincide, those factors will generally be determinative of the appropriate forum. The capacity of the receiving court to provide an expeditious hearing is relevant but will not prevent transfer where the court is satisfied the receiving court can accommodate the urgency. The question of whether an applicant bears an onus of proof in cross-vesting applications remains unresolved by the High Court.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 33 later cases that cite this judgment.
3 of the 33 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.