Pittaway v Noosa Cat Australia Pty Ltd & Ors

[2016] QCA 4

Queensland Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Dismissal for want of prosecution
3. › Exercise of discretion under r 280 UCPR
4. › Factors to be considered
5. › Whether primary judge erred in assessment of prospects of success, prejudice, and responsibility for delay
6. › Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Qld), r 280
1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Dismissal for want of prosecution
3. › Assessment of prospects of success
4. › Whether application should be treated as trial or summary judgment
5. › Distinction between r 280 application and summary judgment under r 292
6. › Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Qld), rr 280, 292
1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Dismissal for want of prosecution
3. › Prejudice to defendant
4. › Whether prejudice must be assessed by reference to net delay caused by plaintiff
5. › Whether incurring of legal costs constitutes prejudice leading to inability to ensure fair trial
1. Appeal
2. › Leave to appeal from District Court
3. › Whether appeal necessary to correct substantial injustice
4. › Whether reasonable argument of error
5. › District Court of Queensland Act 1967 (Qld), s 118(3)

Quick Take

On an application to dismiss for want of prosecution under r 280 UCPR, the court must not treat the application as a trial or summary judgment; an affidavit verifying a detailed pleading may be sufficient to address prospects of success without requiring a blow-for-blow response to the opposing party's evidence. Prejudice must be assessed by reference to the net delay attributable to the plaintiff, not the total elapsed time or total costs of the litigation. Where both parties have contributed to delay, the court must identify the respective contributions before attributing prejudice.