Cockburn v Hyne & Son Pty Ltd [2000] QCA 5
[2000] QCA 5
COURT OF APPEAL
de JERSEY CJ
MCMURDO P
THOMAS JA
Appeal No 9326 of 1999
JOHN TREVOR COCKBURN Respondent (Plaintiff)
v.
HYNE & SON PTY LTD Applicant (Defendant)
BRISBANE
..DATE 02/02/2000
JUDGMENT
-- 1 of 2 --
2 JUDGMENT
THE CHIEF JUSTICE: Leave should not be given in my view.
Further ventilation of the issues is better reserved to any
appeal following a trial judgment. No injustice of any
relevance would result from our taking that course.
There is no question of the loss of any right to plead or
ventilate a limitations point, as had been confirmed to us.
Furthermore, proper comprehensive consideration of the
relevant issues may well involve factual determinations which
have not yet been made, for example, whether the claimed
injuries amount to injuries within the particular terms of the
statutory definition.
It is not, in short, an appropriate vehicle in which we should
be making definitive judgments in an area of the law in which
a number of cases are currently coming through the system. I
would refuse the application.
THE PRESIDENT: I agree that this is not an appropriate case
in which to grant leave for an interlocutory judgment for the
reasons given by the Chief Justice.
THOMAS JA: I agree.
THE CHIEF JUSTICE: The application is refused.
THE CHIEF JUSTICE: Costs reserved.
-- 2 of 2 --
Official source: https://www.sclqld.org.au/caselaw/QCA/2000/005