//
© 2026 Zoe. All rights reserved.
Zoe is a legal information platform. Always consult the Federal Register of Legislation for authoritative text.
[2026] NSWSC 609
Supreme Court of NSW
2026-05-29
Elkaim AJ
Original judgment source is linked above.
Source: NSW Caselaw (www.caselaw.nsw.gov.au). Converted to plain text by ZoeLaw. Not the official version.
Medium Neutral Citation: Goodworth v Department of Communities & Justice [2026] NSWSC 609
Hearing dates: 15 & 29 May 2026
Date of orders: 29 May 2026
Decision date: 29 May 2026
Jurisdiction: Common Law
Before: Elkaim AJ
Decision: 1. Unless an application to join a party to replace the deceased party is made within 14 days the proceedings in relation to the cause of action are dismissed.
2. No order is made as to the costs of the proceedings.
Catchwords: CIVIL PROCEDURE — application pursuant to r 6.31 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW) to dismiss proceedings following death of plaintiff — order made — no issue of principle
Legislation Cited: Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW), s 14
Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW), rr 6.30, 6.31
Category: Procedural rulings
Parties: Jaimie Leigh Goodworth (Plaintiff)
Department of Communities & Justice (Defendant)
Representation: Counsel:
S Maxwell-Milne, A Naser (Solicitors for Plaintiff)
L McCann (Solicitor for Defendant)
Solicitors:
Slater & Gordon (Plaintiff)
McCabes Lawyers (Defendant)
File Number(s): 2023/462714
Publication restriction: No
These proceedings were commenced with the filing of a statement of claim on 21 December 2023. The plaintiff’s claim was for damages arising from his alleged abuse while detained in a Juvenile Justice Centre between 16 January 2008 and 4 July 2009.
The plaintiff died, allegedly by murder, on 24 February 2024. I will refer to him as the deceased.
On 1 July 2025, the plaintiff’s solicitors filed a notice of motion seeking an order, pursuant to r 6.30(2) of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW) (UCPR), that the “estate of the plaintiff is to be represented by his legal personal representative.”
The plaintiff’s estate did not, as at 1 July 2025, have a personal representative. Ms Karen Gough, the deceased’s mother, has provided an affidavit dated 17 July 2025 giving some background. She is the grandmother of the deceased’s three daughters.
On 16 July 2025, Ms Gough retained Ms Jayne Humphreys from the “Estate Planning Centre” to commence an application for Ms Gough to be appointed as the administrator of the deceased’s estate, thus making her the deceased’s personal representative.
On 8 August 2025, I adjourned the motion, in chambers, to 13 March 2026, to enable the administration process to continue. On 9 March 2026, I allowed a further adjournment of the motion for the same purpose.
The motion then came back before me on 15 May 2026.
The matter was brought up to date by an affidavit of Mr Daniil Volodin, dated 11 May 2026. Mr Volodin is the solicitor in the firm that was acting for the plaintiff in the original proceedings. Mr Volodin explained in his affidavit that he has had continuing communication with Ms Gough, who has told him that she has not been appointed as an administrator, that she does not wish to be so appointed, and that no other person has indicated a willingness to accept the appointment.
In addition, Ms Gough indicated that:
“… she was hospitalised a month ago due to mental health breakdown and that the criminal proceeding against the alleged murderer of the Plaintiff is ongoing and continuing to have a significant impact on her.”
“Ms Gough confirmed that she understands this and advised me that she didn’t believe the Plaintiff would have wanted her to be impacted by his ongoing proceeding in the way that it has.”
The (original) plaintiff’s solicitors were then in the position where they could not progress the matter, they are not instructed and they “defer to this Honourable Court to make orders that the Court deems appropriate.”
The defendant’s position, on 15 May 2026, was that the proceedings should be dismissed for want of prosecution.
I suggested a formal application needed to be made pursuant to r 6.31 of the UCPR which states:
Court may dismiss proceedings not prosecuted following death of party
(1) This rule applies to any proceedings in which—
(a) a party dies, but a cause of action in the proceedings survives his or her death, and
(b) an order for the joinder of a party to replace the deceased party is not made within 3 months after the death.
(2) The court may order that, unless an application to join a party to replace the deceased party is made within a specified time, the proceedings in relation to the cause of action concerned be dismissed.
(3) An application for such an order may be made by any person to whom the deceased party’s liability in relation to the cause of action concerned has passed (whether or not a party to the proceedings).
(4) On making an order under this rule, the court may give such directions as it thinks fit for service of the order on any person (whether or not a party to the proceedings) who is interested in continuing the proceedings.
I made an order on 15 May 2026, that the appropriate application should be made within 7 days and that it be served on Ms Gough. The plaintiff’s solicitors kindly agreed to accept service of the application on behalf of Ms Gough. This would enable her to decide, finally, that she does not wish to take on the case (or the administration of the estate). I stood the matter over to today, 29 May 2026.
On 22 May 2026, the defendant filed the notice of motion I had suggested seeking dismissal of the proceedings under r 6.31 of the UCPR. The motion is supported by an affidavit of Mr Luke McCann dated 22 May 2026. Mr McCann is a solicitor acting for the defendant.
Mr McCann sets out a full history of the proceedings up to the letter on 8 May 2026 from the plaintiff’s solicitor, telling him that Ms Gough had not obtained letters of administration, and that Ms Gough no longer wished to continue seeking to represent the deceased’s estate.
In relation to the service of the defendant’s application on Ms Gough, that occurred on 25 May 2026.
Ms Gough confirmed her attitude, that she did not wish to be the personal representative, and that there are no other persons who might be prepared to administer the plaintiff’s estate.
Returning to r 6.31 of the UCPR, an order for the joinder of a party to replace the deceased has not been made within 3 months after the deceased’s death. This enables the court to make an order that unless an application to join a party to replace the deceased is made within a specified time, the proceedings are to be dismissed.
I think it is appropriate to make such an order.
Accordingly, I make the following orders:
Unless an application to join a party to replace the deceased party is made within 14 days, the proceedings in relation to the cause of action are dismissed.
No order is made as to the costs of the proceedings.
**********
Goodworth
Department of Communities & Justice