CIVIL PROCEDURE — Consolidation of proceedings — Joint hearings — Factual cross-over between proceedings — Risk of inconsistent judgments if heard separately — Consolidation ordered
Quick Take
1Where two personal injury proceedings arise from the same course of employment, over the same period, for the same employer, and at the same or similar worksites, the risk of inconsistent judicial findings on almost identical allegations of negligence and breach of statutory duty weighs strongly in favour of a joint hearing under UCPR r 28.5.
2The discretion to order consolidation or joint hearing will not be exercised where a party demonstrates a real possibility of prejudice, but the mere fact that the proceedings involve different discrete injuries and different mechanisms of injury does not of itself establish such prejudice where there is substantial factual and legal overlap.
3The overriding purpose in s 56 of the Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW) — the just, quick and cheap resolution of the real issues in dispute — supports early consolidation during the case management phase to avoid duplication of costs and to focus the parties on the specific issues in dispute.
