Crane v Battle Mountain (Aust) Inc & MMI [1999] QCA 476
SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND
CITATION: Crane v Battle Mountain (Aust) Inc & MMI
[1999] QCA 476
PARTIES: RONALD HENRY CRANE
(plaintiff/appellant)
v
ALLISON MAREE GARDE and SUNCORP
GENERAL INSURANCE LIMITED
(ACN 075 695 966)
(first defendants)
and
BATTLE MOUNTAIN (AUSTRALIA) INC
(ARBN 000 812 751) and MMI GENERAL
INSURANCE LIMITED (ACN 000 122 850)
(second defendants/respondents)
FILE NO/S: Appeal No 12034 of 1998
SC No 688 of 1997
DIVISION: Court of Appeal
PROCEEDING: Appeal
ORIGINATING
COURT: Supreme Court at Townsville
DELIVERED ON: 16 November 1999
DELIVERED AT: Brisbane
HEARING DATE: 22 September 1999
JUDGES: Pincus JA, Davies JA, Ambrose J
ORDER: Appeal allowed with costs. Orders made below set aside.
It is ordered on the summons dated 10 December 1998,
filed on behalf of the appellant, that the relief sought by
paras 1 and 2 of that summons be granted with costs to be
paid by MMI General Insurance Ltd. On the summons
dated 15 December 1998, issued on behalf of Battle
Mountain (Australia) Inc, it is ordered that that summons
be dismissed with costs.
CATCHWORDS: LIMITATION OF ACTIONS – GENERAL –
APPLICATION OF STATUTES OF LIMITATION –
application for joinder of insurer pursuant to s 52 Motor
Accident Insurance Act – whether s 11 Limitation of Actions
Act prevents joinder - application of De Innocentis v Brisbane
City Council
-- 1 of 3 --
2
De Innocentis v Brisbane City Council (Appeal No 12032 of
1998, 24 September 1999; [1999] QCA 404)
Limitation of Actions Act 1974, s 11
Motor Accident Insurance Act 1994, s 52
COUNSEL: Mr D B Fraser QC, with him Mr M E Pope, for the appellant
Mr K Holyoak for the respondents
SOLICITORS: Lee Turnbull & Co for the appellant
McInnes Wilson for the respondents
[1] THE COURT: This is an appeal against orders made by Cullinane J in a personal
injuries case, relating to an accident said to have occurred on 22 March 1995. The
writ in the action was issued on 17 July 1997. The appellant's case sought to be
pursued in the action is that he was driving a vehicle along a road when a rock was
thrown up by the wheels of a vehicle being driven in the opposite direction. It went
through the windscreen and injured the appellant, he says, because of negligence on
the part of the driver (Ms Garde) of the vehicle whose wheels threw up the rock and
because of negligence and breach of duty on the part of the second defendant in the
action, which I shall call Battle Mountain, in providing the appellant with a motor
vehicle having an unsafe windscreen. The writ was issued against Ms Garde and
Battle Mountain only, not against any insurer.
[2] The third party insurer of Ms Garde's vehicle, Suncorp General Insurance Limited,
was joined by consent on 16 December 1998. The applications before Cullinane J
which brought this appeal about were principally for an order adding as a defendant
MMI General Insurance Ltd, the third party insurer of the vehicle being driven by
the appellant, and for an order striking the action out against Battle Mountain. The
appellant's application to join MMI failed and the application to strike the action out
against Battle Mountain succeeded.
[3] In the reasons given by Cullinane J, his Honour sets out other facts than those
mentioned above, which were regarded as relevant to the exercise of the discretions
sought to be invoked. It does not appear necessary, however, to include that
information in these reasons. That is so because it was, at the hearing of this
appeal, accepted that the appeal must succeed, if it is correct that s 11 of the
Limitation of Actions Act 1974 does not provide a defence to an insurer joined
outside the three year time limit imposed by that section.
[4] In De Innocentis v Brisbane City Council (Appeal No 12032 of 1998, 24 September
1999; [1999] QCA 404) it was held by this Court that s 11, just referred to, does
not protect insurers joined under s 52 of the Motor Accident Insurance Act 1994;
s 52(1) requires that an action of the present kind, claiming damages for personal
injury arising out of a motor vehicle accident, be brought against the insured person
and the insurers as joint defendants. The consequence is that, if the learned primary
judge had joined MMI as a defendant on the appellant's application, no limitation
defence under s 11 of the Limitation of Actions Act 1974 would have been available
to it. The learned primary judge, referring to the application for joinder of MMI,
said that the appellant had –
-- 2 of 3 --
3
" … brought an action against the insured person, but not against the
insurer within the limitation period and thus has no-one against
whom he can obtain a judgment in respect of his claim for personal
injuries".
His Honour went on to consider whether the discretion to join MMI should, despite
the action against MMI being statute barred, be exercised in favour of the appellant
and determined that question against the appellant; because of the decision given in
this Court in De Innocentis, no question of a discretion to join MMI out of time
arises. It should, however, be added that with commendable candour counsel for
MMI, Mr Holyoak, referred us to s 81 of the Supreme Court of Queensland Act
1991 as potentially relevant to the application to join MMI, if we held that the
action against it was subject to the three year time limit. Since we have not so held,
it is unnecessary to discuss the way in which s 81 might affect the outcome of such
an application.
[5] The appeal must be allowed with costs and the orders made below set aside. It will
be ordered on the summons dated 10 December 1998, filed on behalf of the
appellant, that the relief sought by paras 1 and 2 of that summons be granted with
costs to be paid by MMI General Insurance Ltd. On the summons dated
15 December 1998, issued on behalf of Battle Mountain (Australia) Inc it will be
ordered that that summons be dismissed with costs.
-- 3 of 3 --
Official source: https://www.sclqld.org.au/caselaw/QCA/1999/476