//
[2025] ACTSC 129
General information, not legal advice.
Supreme Court of the ACT
2025-04-04
McCallum CJ
Original judgment source is linked above.
Zoe will write a short plain-English summary of this judgment and email it to you for free: what it was about, what the court decided and why. It can take up to a minute.
General information, not legal advice.
Or create a free account to save it and ask Zoe follow-up questions.
Source: the ACT Courts (www.courts.act.gov.au). Converted to plain text by ZoeLaw. Not the official version.
SUPREME COURT OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY
Case Title: Everett v Williams Citation: [2025] ACTSC 129 Hearing Date: 4 April 2025 Decision Date: 4 April 2025 Before: McCallum CJ Decision: (1) I grant leave nunc pro tunc to the plaintiff pursuant to s 79(1) of the Civil Law (Wrongs) Act 2002 (ACT) to begin these proceedings. (2) Note that, by force of s 79(3) of the Act, the proceedings are stayed until the claimant complies with Ch 5 or the proceeding is discontinued or otherwise ends. (3) Note the Court’s expectation that the requirements of Ch 5 will be complied with within 6 months. (4) Stand the proceedings over to 10 October 2025 in the civil applications list at 9:45am. (5) Costs of and incidental to this application be costs in the cause. Catchwords: CIVIL LAW – JURISDICTION, PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – claim for damages for motor vehicle accident – application of Civil Law (Wrongs) Act 2002 (ACT) Legislation Cited: Civil Law (Wrongs) Act 2002 (ACT), Ch 5, s 79 Motor Accident Injuries Act 2019 (ACT), s 138 Parties: Jennifer Lee Everett (Plaintiff) Katherine Williams (First Defendant) AAI Limited t/as GIO (Second Defendant) Representation: Counsel J Reid (Plaintiff) I Molenkamp (Defendants) Solicitors Maliganis Edwards Johnson (Plaintiff) Moray & Agnew Lawyers (Defendants) File Number: SC 48 of 2025 McCALLUM CJ: EX TEMPORE REASONS (REVISED)
Before the Court is an application seeking leave pursuant to s 79 of the Civil Law (Wrongs) Act 2002 (ACT) to begin a proceeding based on a motor vehicle accident claim. The motor vehicle accident occurred on 21 February 2020. However, the plaintiff’s injuries, as I am informed from the Bar table, did not stabilise for a period of time and, indeed, have still not stabilised.
Section 138(1)(b)(i) of the Motor Accident Injuries Act 2019 (ACT) governs the circumstances of a person whose injuries have not yet stabilised. In short, the statutory regime contemplates that the processes required under the Civil Law (Wrongs) Act will not be undertaken until that has occurred.
On 19 February 2025, the plaintiff commenced proceedings without seeking the leave required under s 79 of the Civil Law (Wrongs) Act in circumstances where the limitation period was due to expire two days later. The application seeks to regularise the commencement of the proceedings without leave.
Section 79 provides that the court on an application may give leave to the claimant to begin a proceeding in the court for damages based on a liability for personal injury despite non-compliance with Ch 5 of the Act if the court is satisfied there is an urgent need to begin the proceeding. Plainly, there was an urgent need in the present case as the limitation period was about to expire.
Section 79(2) provides that the order giving leave may be made on conditions the court considers appropriate. Section 79(3) provides that, if leave is given, the proceeding begun by leave is stayed until the claimant complies with “this chapter”. Read together, those sections are capable of being construed to provide an unlimited period during which a claimant may comply with the requirements of Ch 5. That construction would plainly be absurd. For that reason, I consider it appropriate to impose a time limitation on the compliance with the requirements of Ch 5.
Orders
I certify that the preceding six [6] numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment of her Honour Chief Justice McCallum Associate: Date:
Everett
Williams [2025] ACTSC 129