Bounces and buckets – Gretel Tippett and interlocutory determination of limitation periods

Today’s bounce ($0.02 on a random topic) – Gretel Tippett takes out the Australian netball’s most prestigious individual accolade. Go Gretel!

And the bucket ($0.02 on a legal principle) – limitation points in interlocutory stoushes.

Good on Gretel for winning the Liz Elis Diamond. 95%+ shooter! That’s what I call buckettttsssss. She’s a former basketballer in the WNBL, but at around the age of 20 made the switch to netball, and it seems to have paid off!

Now for the bucket. Just say you have a limitation argument – should you run a strike-out or summary judgment application? If it’s a case involving a contingent loss in particular, consider being cautious.

In Wardley Australia Ltd v WA (1992) 175 CLR 514 at 533, the High Court said it was “undesirable” that limitation questions of the kind in that case be decided ahead of a hearing “except in the clearest of cases”. Generally speaking, insufficient was known of the damage and circumstances it was sustained to justify a confident answer to the question of when loss was suffered – which is the date from which time usually runs.

So, as always, think carefully!

JD #bouncesandbuckets

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: