Dillon & Ors v Nominal Defendant & Ors [2003] QSC 445

State Reporting Bureau Uv^ QSC44& Queensland Government Department of Justice and Attorney-General Transcript of Proceedings Copyright in this transcript is vested in the Crown. Copies thereof must not be made or sold without the written authority of the Director, State Reporting Bureau. SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CIVIL JURISDICTION JONES J Application No 544 of 2003 PAULINE MARGARET DILLON and REVISED COPIES ISSUED State Reporting Bureau Date: 5 December, 2003 First Applicant JALHEEL HILWA GILL by litigation guardian P M DILLON Second Applicant and SASKIA INGRID GILL by litigation guardian P M DILLON Third Applicant and NOMINAL DEFENDANT First Respondent and JOHN JOSEPH MARANO Second Respondent and FAI ALLIANZ LIMITED Third Respondent (ACN 094 802 525) CAIRNS ..DATE 01/12/2003 JUDGMENT WARNING: The publication of information or details likely to lead to the identification of persons in some proceedings is a criminal offence. This is so particularly in relation to the identification of children who are involved in criminal proceedings or proceedings for their protection under the Child Protection Act 1999, and complainants in criminal sexual offences, but is not limited to those categories. You may wish to seek legal advice before giving others access to the details of any person named in these proceedings. 1 4th Floor, The Law Courts, George Street, Brisbane, Q. 4000 Telephone: (07) 3247 4360 Fax: (07) 3247 5532 -- 1 of 2 -- 01122003 D.l T5/KSJ M/T CNS1/2003 (Jones J) HIS HONOUR: This is an application for leave to commence a claim under the Motor Accident Insurance Act 1994 (MAIA) . The applicant is the widow of Darren David Gill who died as a result of a motor vehicle incident on the 2nd of December 2000. A claim is made by the applicant and by her child and the child of her marriage with the late David Gill. The proceedings must be commenced by the 2nd of December 2003 to meet the requirements of the statute of limitation. Of the three respondents, the first respondent has accepted the claim as complying with requirements of MAIA, the second and third respondents have not. This order is made despite that non compliance . Given the pending expiration of the period of limitations and the circumstances generally and, in particular, because each of the parties have agreed to the order being made, I will make the orders before me by consent in terms of the draft initialled by me and placed with the papers. 2 JUDGMENT -- 2 of 2 --