Litigation limits and what if damaged exceed capped limit

LFlanders on 10/10/2018 - 07:47
Last edited 11/10/2018 - 11:04 by 1 other user

I have to sue a company for wrongdoing.
I may have to also sue some individuals within the conpany, particularly a senior manager who submitted a false/fraudulent report againts me, and used his power and influence to further treat me unfairly, with help of his colleagues.

Matters include discrimination and negligence. I think I have a very strong case for both.

I have very limited funds at this time, as a disabled pensioner. I am thinking maybe I should tackle 1 of the smaller persons involved in small claims court, then use that small amount to persue the larger lawsuit against the company and its senior manager.

Now I know that small claims court deals with matters under $10,000 .
Anti discrimination board I think is capped at $100,000 for discrimination, $100,000 for related victimization.

Then I think the next court up is capped at $200,000 and then I recently read that supreme court level deals with matters $750,000 or above.

Now what I really need to know before I go any further, is;
**what happens if damages are more than $10,000 in small claims court ?
Or similarly, if I litigate at the court level with $200,000 cap, then what happens if damages once assessed exceed $200,000 ?
Can I then litigate for the additional amount ? **

For example, I sue at the court level capped at $200,000 and when I have all damages appraised, it comes out to $350,000 , then do I have an option to follow up and sue for the other $150,000 .
Or if I sue 1 of the smaller players directly responsible for gross negligence, in small claims court and get $10,000 and then once I afford legal advice I find out they should have paid me $25,000 , can I get thet extra $15,000 in another court (fpr the same injury, psychological harm caused by their negligence) .

Also, would statute of limitations rules for the additional amount have to be met, or since I lodged the initial lawsuit etc , then found I was actually owed more than that court allows for, then does the original file of claim date carry on to the additional claim for the surplus fairly owed .

Any advice would be much appreciated. This is a David and Goliath type circumstance, where a huge company with lots of money and Lawyers is against a disabled person with basically no support at all.

Thanks in advance .

Financial

closed Comments

2jzzzz on 10/10/2018 - 08:00

+23

I would not be asking these questions on this forum. I would engage community legal aid or go with one of the firms who do no win no fee.
- Flanders on 10/10/2018 - 16:24
  
  Thanks. Local NSW legal aid will not assist at all. Is that what you mean by "community legal aid" ?
  Is there any way to check which no win no fee lawyers are best ?
  - Scab on 10/10/2018 - 18:39
    
    +1
    
    Most lawyers don't do no win no fee for civil stuff.
    
    They only do the no fee for things like compo claims, will disputes and estates.
whooah1979 on 10/10/2018 - 08:05

+7

Is this homework? Of not then engage a solicitor that may give proper legal advice.
Baysew on 10/10/2018 - 08:40

+3

Is one of the people you want to sue is named Homer?
- djkelly69 on 10/10/2018 - 11:41
  
  Nah, probably Mr Burns, Smithers, Lenny, Carl and the whole power plant. May be asking for a friend (Homer).
Seedy seed on 10/10/2018 - 08:47

+6

Lol, what could they have possibly done to you that requires 100000 compensation let alone 200-750k…

This isnt america, you wont get large amounts of money for nothing. You must prove actual loss, also see if no win no fee are interested, if your case has a good chance to win they will be on it like flys to poo. If not do not sue, not even they belive in it.

Also keep in mind you pay if you win, if they get you 8000 but their costs are 20000 youowe them 12000.
- John Kimble on 10/10/2018 - 08:52
  
  Also keep in mind you pay if you win, if they get you 8000 but their costs are 20000 youowe them 12000.
  
  Wow, crazy.
  - mskeggs on 10/10/2018 - 09:56
    
    +1
    
    Only if costs are awarded against you. Which would never happen if you win, but may happen if you lose.
    Unless you mean your own legal costs might exceed any damages, which is pretty routine.
    
    The costs of a trial are the deterrent against frivolous legal action.
    - HighAndDry on 10/10/2018 - 11:00
      
      +1
      
      Which would never happen if you win, but may happen if you lose.
      
      This is incorrect.
      
      If they agree to settle for $10,000, you refuse and you only win in court for $9,000, they can get their costs from you.
      - mskeggs on 10/10/2018 - 11:07
        
        +2
        
        @HighAndDry: True. A good example of why you get what you pay for with amateur legal advice offered free on the Internet.
        
        Seedy seed on 10/10/2018 - 13:14
        
        @mskeggs: Lol i always discourage legal action :) to much cost to reward usually.
hawkeye on 10/10/2018 - 09:58

Are you trying to sue Ceneterlink?
mskeggs on 10/10/2018 - 10:00

You are only likely to get a payout if you can prove actual financial losses, such as failure to pay what was owed, or lost earnings from an injury.

If you have a real case, go see one of the law firms who act on contingency. They will take 1/3 to 1/2 of any award if you win, but charge nothing if you lose. They won't pursue your case if they think the risk of losing and having costs awarded is possible.
- Flanders on 10/10/2018 - 18:43
  
  Thanks. Really though ??
  They take half of third of settlement even when you win and have costs awarded etc. I had thought they would just take out their share ie. How many ever hours they have billed etc.
  Also I thought if court awards costs to me, as the winning litigant, that the court could award the full payment owed to lawyers, then I would be left with what I am owed.
  - HighAndDry on 10/10/2018 - 20:05
    
    The whole point of contingency based fees is that they're taking a risk. If you don't win - you don't pay their fees. If you don't want that, then you can pay their fees normally.
futureminime on 10/10/2018 - 10:11
Hi Flanders,

Starting point: I am not a lawyer. There are community legal aid options and no win-no fee lawyers who you can talk to without cost to give better direction.

That said things you should consider:

In my understanding is that you can only sue for damages incurred. If there actions stopped you working or requires support/counselling you may be able to claim those costs. Outline what the wrongdoing was (for yourself, to take to legal support).

You have said: 'I think I have a very strong case for both.' A strong case isn't based on if the actions occurred rather than if they are true. Regardless of the truth of your claim, there is a senior manager and other employees who disagree, or at least say they will. Think of this from a Judge's perspective - two parties make claims. There will be some documentation they will have needed to maintain but unless you can bring compelling evidence, or disprove certain events its a numbers game.

Lastly, when you get some advice, also look into the affect of the payout on your disability pension. The way damages are awarded (ie to replace loss wages) will probably have an effect on ongoing payments. Don't want to go through all this to pick up a debt with Centrelink

Best of luck.
- Flanders on 10/10/2018 - 18:08
  
  +1
  
  Hi furtureismine, and thankyou very much for your detailed suggestions and information provided.
  
  In my understanding is that you can only sue for damages incurred. If there actions stopped you working or requires support/counselling you may be able to claim those costs. Outline what the wrongdoing was (for yourself, to take to legal support).
  There is lost income, as I have physical disability, and my only way to work is through getting education and then I would have a reasonably high paying career, which I would also enjoy. There would be counselling required also, due to the trauma of events which have occured due to negligence and discrimination.
  2) You have said: 'I think I have a very strong case for both.' A strong case isn't based on if the actions occurred rather than if they are true. Regardless of the truth of your claim, there is a senior manager and other employees who disagree, or at least say they will. Think of this from a Judge's perspective - two parties make claims. There will be some documentation they will have needed to maintain but unless you can bring compelling evidence, or disprove certain events its a numbers game.
  
  I do have lots of documentation. The university also has documentation, but their allegations and documents to go with allegations do not match. ie. They give conflicting versions of events, whereboth cannot reasonably be believed to be truthful.
  For example; The deputy vice chancellor, alleged that i stood for no reason during a meeting with him . And they have an ambitious policy whereby they can make a report leading to sususpension based on something "MAY cause another yo feel uncomfortable or intimidaed" . I stood during the meeting due to back injury disability. He alleged otherwise, however his own note taker that was present, contradicts his false version of events.
  He also claimed under the same policy that I acted "UNUSUALLY" and that this fit their category of 'things which may cause another to feel uncomfortable' .
  He also claimed in the same report, that I began my studies by failing. Again, false and misleading and my academic records show evidence beyond doubt, that he lied there.
  I did stand during the meeting with DVC i did have my hands behind my back, in a deliberate effort to ensure that I wasnot standing in any kind of threatening position or pose, and I did explain to him immediately my need to stand due to back injury. He insisted I sit, regardless of it causing me pain and further injury to my lower back. I did make a complaint about him through the correct processes. He responded by submitting the false and misleading 'Designated Staff Report' which he sent straight to a person with the uni that can use the report, combined with policy , to suspend me from access to education.
  
  3) Lastly, when you get some advice, also look into the affect of the payout on your disability pension. The way damages are awarded (ie to replace loss wages) will probably have an effect on ongoing payments. Don't want to go through all this to pick up a debt with Centrelink
  
  Thanks for the tip. I really do not want to stay on disability pension, and money is not the primary reason I am litigating. I only want justice, and sufficient measures to be put in place, so this does not occur to others. Apparently, from reading news articles, my university has done similar things previously ie. Lying and using their extensive knowledge of their own policies, to find kind of loop holes so they can basically do absolutely anything they want, and find a way of trying to justify it by claiming they are just following policy.
  In my circumstances, they have also not followed their own policies on procedural fairness and 'natural justice' .
  I am thinking maybe it would have more of a significant impact towards real and meaningful change to help others in the future, if I sue some of the individuals involved, and have them answer for their wrongful actions.
  With the deputy vice chancellor against me, and his willingness to manipulate the system according to his will, rather than according to what is just and right, it seems a very difficult and probably impossible matter to deal with without legal proceedings.
  Unfortunately, some people within organizations are quite willing to go along with anything their senior management want, regardless of whether their obedience to such leaderships is unethical and unfair. I guess that is how they get ahead, by obeying upper management regardless.
  I have a strong belief in our democracy and our systems in place in Australia. It is a public university and as such answerable to the public, as well as answerable to following our laws.
  I do believe too much wrongdoing continues, when good people know about it, yet do nothing and obey their leaders blindly.
  Thanks very much for everybody trying to be helpful.
  A few trolls here also, but I guess that is common with any forum.
HighAndDry on 10/10/2018 - 10:56

+1

Matters include discrimination and negligence. I think I have a very strong case for both.

Unless you're a lawyer, no way you can say this. Just on the basis that you want to sue for "discrimination and negligence", I'm going to say you likely don't have a case at all, much less a strong one. Not a lawyer, not your lawyer, etc.

To answer your question:

what happens if damages are more than $10,000 in small claims court

You can only claim up to $10,000 in small claims court. If damages exceed that, you'll have to decide whether you want to claim more, and if you do, you'll have to transfer it out of the Small Claims division.
- [Deactivated] on 10/10/2018 - 11:15
  
  sue for "discrimination and negligence", I'm going to say you likely don't have a case at all
  
  I was thinking the same thing as there are rarely hard facts presented in these hearings.
  - Flanders on 10/10/2018 - 16:17
    
    It is a university, and hard records are kept. However their records don't match up ie. They lied and continue to lie, but there is hard evidence showing they lied to cover their own ass (and deputy vice chancellors wrongdoing).
    They claimed things in a report, which I can prove are untrue, which then led to me being suspended indefinitely, unless I agree do things they demand of me, which are unreasonable, costly, and based on the DVC false and negligent report.
    It is the kind of situation, where when one tells the truth, it is easy, when one tellls lies, they have to tell another lie to cover the previous lie etc, and some of the lies he has told and used to get rid of me, can be proven beyond reasonable doubt. Unless maybe cannot be proven beyond reasonable doubt, but that is not the standard for civil litigation . It is more a 'balance of probability' burden of proof required.
    - mskeggs on 10/10/2018 - 19:24
      
      +2
      
      Based on the information above, you do not have a legal case, but I am not a lawyer. To be blunt, your posts come across as a nuisance litigant - hoping to sue for big money over matters that are comparatively minor (although obviously important to you).
      If you feel the university has treated you unfairly, you should aim to exhaust their avenues of review long before you go to court.
      The university will have an appeal panel. I suggest you take your case to them.
      - HighAndDry on 10/10/2018 - 20:08
        
        @mskeggs: I'm inclined to be more generous and think OP might truly think he has a case. Without really wanting to pry further, or be too insensitive (yes, that's likely a first for me), I wonder what kind of disability OP suffers from.
        
        whooah1979 on 10/10/2018 - 20:09
        
        @HighAndDry: back injury disability
        
        HighAndDry on 10/10/2018 - 20:15
        
        @whooah1979: OP's said that, but I'm honestly wondering if that's the only one.
[Deactivated] on 10/10/2018 - 11:13

+9

The only court most OzBargainers know is the food court.
hawkeye on 10/10/2018 - 11:20

+2

Matters include discrimination and negligence. I think I have a very strong case for both

None of this fits a small claim hearing in other words your in the wrong courtroom before you've even started.

What is small claims?
A small claims action focuses on recovering small amounts of money and is faster and more informal than other court proceedings.

Make sure you have all the information you need:

name and address of defendant(s) (and Australian company number if defendant is a company)
amount of your claim
description of the goods and their value, if you are claiming recovery of goods
amount of interest you are claiming
amount of filing fee
amount of service fee
brief explanation of how the claim arose, including relevant dates
name and address of the court where you will be filing the statement of claim.
djkelly69 on 10/10/2018 - 11:48

+4

Many lawyers will talk to you for free to see if you have a case with a reasonable chance of success. This should be your first (and likely only) step.
- Flanders on 10/10/2018 - 18:13
  
  Thanks Djkelly .
  Anyone know how I can find a good lawyer for this, that will see me free ? (if I have a reasonable chance of success).
  This is very important to me (Im a bit OCD) so i want to make sure I get this right. Im not too keen on just looking through the phonebook and guessing which ones might be good :/
  I guess you cannot really find reliable reviews on lawyers. Im not sure .
one man clan on 10/10/2018 - 12:09

+1

Oooh i want to hear this story.

Does this sound like you: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Querulant https://www.wtsglobal.com/the-vexatious-litigant/

If so, rethink your strategy before you get caught in litigation neurosis
tsunamisurfer on 10/10/2018 - 14:18

Can we have a bit more detail on how a Disability Pensioner (with an income of $835/fn) suffered hundreds of thousands of dollars of financial loss?
- Flanders on 10/10/2018 - 16:22
  
  -1
  
  I am unsure of damages, nor how exactly they are assessed.
  Obviously, it has nothing to do with my disability pension, that is there regardless.
  Loss of future income, loss of quality of life (psychological harm) caused by me not being allowed to complete my education and do my 'dream career' where I would feel fulfilled.
  - tsunamisurfer on 10/10/2018 - 16:32
    
    +2
    
    In that case, when you find a lawyer can you please let me know too?
    
    Last week a guy jumped in front of me in the lotto queue, if he hadn't done that the slikpik tickets would have defintely won as the only division 1 prize. I want to sue that mofo for $10m.
    
    See what I did?
    - Flanders on 10/10/2018 - 17:29
      
      -1
      
      Winning the 10 mill in lotto, is not 'foreseeable' .
      Getting an education, then getting a better job, is very 'foreseeable'.
      1 in 100 mill chance of winning lottery.
      Whereas I believe most highly educated persons have a better job, than if they had not gotten any education.
      Good luck with your lotto thing tho :)
  - HighAndDry on 10/10/2018 - 20:18
    
    +1
    
    Loss of future income, loss of quality of life (psychological harm) caused by me not being allowed to complete my education and do my 'dream career' where I would feel fulfilled.
    
    Just….. look, you call 100 lawyers and tell them this and they'll all brush you off because this really isn't something you can sue for.
    
    From what you've said here - which is not a lot - the most you can get is maybe an apology from the University if they've actually done something wrong, and maybe get you re-instated in whatever course you were doing. And which you'll probably fail out of again, because reading between the lines you were either suspended for academic performance, or conduct, or a mix of both. Let me know where I've gotten it wrong.
  - monkeybusiness on 10/10/2018 - 22:04
    
    None of these so called damages can be easily quantifiable. A degree is no guarantee that it can turn into a "dream career".
    
    You won't get very far in trying to convince anyone the extent of damages.
    
    The best you can hope for is apology and possibly a refund of the fees you already paid for your degree.
    
    Move on mate.
    - Flanders on 10/10/2018 - 23:05
      
      -2
      
      And where did you get your law degree mate ?
      - monkeybusiness on 11/10/2018 - 00:09
        
        +1
        
        @Flanders: You don't need a law degree to see how ridiculous it sounds that a potential uni degree is equal to a dream career without doing the hard yards in between.
        
        The only way this could hold true is if you are already employed and your employer requested you to do this degree before moving you to a "dream role".
        
        Mate, not having a go at you and I understand emotions are running high and justified or not you feel hard done by. But take a step back and most times you will realise how far fetched the arguments are and what you want in financial compensation in the hundreds of thousands is in no way reflective of the harm done. You could just as easily done the degree somewhere else.
        
        Flanders on 11/10/2018 - 02:49
        
        @monkeybusiness: Do you realise how ridiculously ignorant it sounds for you to assume such things, when you have no knowledge at all of the actual evidence and the case. LOL . Continue trolling though , if that all you have in life I pity you :)
FSTB on 10/10/2018 - 17:09

+1

"Matters include discrimination and negligence. I think I have a very strong case for both."

"Loss of future income, loss of quality of life (psychological harm) caused by me not being allowed to complete my education and do my 'dream career' where I would feel fulfilled."

Something here isn't adding up and you haven't told the whole story. Seriously get over it and move on. Did you just pull those dollar figures out of your arse?
Flanders on 10/10/2018 - 18:35

Does anyone actually have any idea regarding my main question which is..
**What happens if someone litigates in a court with a cap of xxx amount $$, then it turns out when damages are properly professionally assessed, that the damages are actually higher than the capped amount for that level of court ??? **
- zonra on 10/10/2018 - 18:38
  
  From what I've seen from the replies, the general consensus is it's best to ask an actual lawyer.
  - Flanders on 10/10/2018 - 18:49
    
    +1
    
    From what I've seen from the replies, the general consensus is it's best to ask an actual lawyer.
    
    True, if I could afford a lawyer that would be ideal. I was hoping someone here might have some idea .
    
    Im sure an OzB-expert here will know ;)
    - zonra on 10/10/2018 - 19:24
      
      +1
      
      I was hoping someone here might have some idea .
      Im sure an OzB-expert here will know ;)
      
      All good and best of luck to you.
      Personally, medical and legal advices are best NOT given to/taken from internet forums.
      Unlike cases like "who's at fault in this crash?" or "Can I get a refund/replacement?", your situation seems too specific, unclear and (imo) risky (as you might end up losing tens of thousands in legal fees) to be relying on "best guesses".
      
      As for your main question:
      
      What happens if someone litigates in a court with a cap of xxx amount $$, then it turns out when damages are properly professionally assessed, that the damages are actually higher than the capped amount for that level of court ???
      
      Can you not ring Legal Aid (or the equivalent in your state) to find out?
- HighAndDry on 10/10/2018 - 20:13
  
  I actually answered you further up. Damages you can be awarded at every level of the court system is capped at its respective limit. You can't claim a higher amount than the limit. It's not an open-ended system where you claim "damages" and the court determines how much. You claim an amount, and the court then determines if you've proven that (or more commonly) how much up to that claimed amount you're actually entitled to.
  
  So e.g.: You claim $10,000 - you can litigate in the small claims division. If the court finds you actually suffered $12,000 in damages but you didn't claim that much? You only get $10,000. However, if before trial you think you can get $12,000 you would then amend your claim and move your case out of the small claims division and (basically) keep suing, but now for the $12,000 amount.
  
  Not a lawyer not your lawyer this is the cliffnotes of the cliffnotes of how it works, etc.
  
  Tl;dr:
  
  GO GET YOUR OWN LAWYER.
  
  Pro-tip though: If you go to see half a dozen lawyers, and they all brush you off? You probably don't have a case.
  - Flanders on 10/10/2018 - 23:11
    
    So a matter can potentially be "moved" from a lower court into the higher capped damages court, without having to file a while new claim and without losing out, because of statute of limitations may have passed, but was still valid at initial filing of claim ?
chumlee on 10/10/2018 - 20:19

Lol.

To be awarded $200k in damages it would have to be some serious financial loss you suffered. Uncommon to be awarded this much
- Flanders on 10/10/2018 - 23:09
  
  Lol. Umkayyy , and when did I say that I will be awarded 200k damages…
  I was giving amounts simply as examples.
whooah1979 on 10/10/2018 - 23:17

I have very limited funds at this time

have you told your wealthy siblings about your story and perhaps asked if they may front the capital for your application? you could then skip the small claims and try local (up to $100,000) > district ($100 000 to $750,000) > supreme (more than $750 000).
- Flanders on 11/10/2018 - 02:57
  
  I would never do that. Ask siblings to front money. Could cause issues with their spouses also ie. Wealthy brother would have to ask his wife of course. 1 of my brothers (and his wife of course) did go to some local charity and then go out to toy store and buy presents for every child there, which is nice of them. I guess they would help if I asked
  They would probably offer, if they knew the situation, but I am not one to burden friends and family.
  I understand pro bono work is done by some lawyers and firms. So that may be the path to follow.
  Thanks very much for the basic jurisdiction info tho "local (up to $100,000) > district ($100 000 to $750,000) > supreme (more than $750 000)." . That info is very helpful. Thanks.
djkelly69 on 10/10/2018 - 23:51

I hate to say this because I know it will lead to a wall of text, but you may as well tell the whole story and see what people think rather than just posting random, disjointed pieces of information.
- Flanders on 11/10/2018 - 03:00
  
  Not relevant. Not in my interests. Could interfere with matters and breach some disclosure laws.
  Absolutely no point in posting every bit of info to strangers in a forum (other than may provide entertainment for others).
  Many here seem to have the idea I am here for judgement LOL . Acting like they are judge, jury, etc .
  Just wanted some basic info, which I now have .
Ace Ventura on 11/10/2018 - 07:52

I'll admit I'm still a little blurry eyed this morning, but I am trying to piece together the story here.
You were in a meeting with university management, why were you there? was this a disciplinary hearing?

At some point, you stood up, a member of the university staff asked you to sit down again.

Something happened here…. what exactly? Did you take offence to the request and cause a scene?

You were suspended from the university. Don't believe this happened because you didn't sit back down. So what was the cause?

and now you want to sue? For? being asked to sit? Or because you were suspended?
Moderatormoocher on 11/10/2018 - 09:28

OP has got the answers now and has requested that the thread be closed.

Litigation limits and what if damaged exceed capped limit

closed Comments

GO GET YOUR OWN LAWYER.

New Forum Topics