ByLawyers News and Updates

Personal injury lists – VIC

by

The Supreme Court has introduced new procedures for matters in the personal injury lists.

Changes have been made to first directions orders in the four specialist personal injury lists in the Common Law Division with the intention of increasing efficiency, and reducing delays and adjournments.

Personal injury lists

In the Supreme Court, personal injury claims are dealt with in four specialist lists:

  • Personal Injuries List
  • Dust Diseases List
  • Institutional Liability List
  • Civil Circuit List

New forms for consent orders

Parties submitting minutes of proposed consent orders in these lists must now use the revised First Directions forms available on the Court’s website and on the matter plan in the By Lawyers Personal Injury (VIC) publication.

The major changes to the standard orders include:

  • the ability for the parties to agree to extend or abridge, by consent, the time for interlocutory steps before the post-mediation directions hearing, or, in the case of expedited Dust Diseases List matters, the final directions hearing;
  • time for issuing subpoenas and serving supplementary reports and final particulars of special damages;
  • when supplementary medical and expert reports can be served close to trial; and
  • matters about which the court expects to be informed at the post-mediation directions hearing, including expert evidence.

Practice notes

The personal injury lists are each managed subject to their relevant Practice Note being:

First Directions Hearing

After the defence is filed, the court will contact the parties to arrange a First Directions Hearing.

The court expects a practitioner with conduct of the file, or a good working knowledge of it, to appear at all directions hearings.

The parties are encouraged to submit consent orders to avoid an appearance.

Publication updates

The commentary and matter plan in the by Lawyers Personal Injury (VIC) publication has been updated accordingly.

Family Property List – VIC

by

New commentary and a link to the VIC County Court Family Property List practice note has been added to the By Lawyers Family Provision Claims guides for Victoria. This applies to both Acting for the plaintiff and Acting for the estate.

The commentary focuses mainly on the Supreme Court where most applications are filed, but the new section suggests that consideration should always be given to whether the plaintiff’s claim is more appropriately filed in the County Court. There is no monetary limit on the County Court’s jurisdiction.

Paragraph 1.3 of the County Court’s Family Property List practice note sets out the factors which make a case suitable for the County Court.

The decision as to which court any proceedings should be commenced in may involve consideration of the obligations upon parties and their legal representatives under Chapter 2 of the Civil Procedure Act 2010 – the ‘overarching obligations’.

If the plaintiff’s decision to file in the Supreme Court is based on a reasonable assessment that the factors in paragraph 1.3 of the Family Property List practice note do not apply it would be very hard to argue that a party, or their lawyer, was in breach of their obligations under Chapter 2 of the Civil Procedure Act 2010 by filing there. However, conversely, a decision by the plaintiff to file in the Supreme Court where those factors do apply might enliven the exercise of the court’s discretionary powers under Part 2.4 of the Act, including as to costs.

These important considerations are now covered in the commentary to assist practitioners, whether acting for a claimant or an estate.

Additionally, the Retainer Instructions have been amended to prompt for this consideration and a new precedent letter has been added to the Acting for the Defendant matter plan. This letter can be used to put the plaintiff’s solicitor on notice when the defendant considers the proceedings have been inappropriately filed in the Supreme Court rather than the County Court.

Connect with us