Benchmark
A daily Bulletin listing our choice of Decisions of Superior Courts of Australia.
 Benchmark

Banking

Friday, 3 October 2014
  Download PDF      Follow us        Search        View in browser
Executive Summary (One Minute Read)
Jackson Lalic Lawyers Pty Ltd v Attwells (NSWCA) - negligence - erroneous refusal to answer separate question - solicitors' advice protected by advocates' immunity - appeal allowed
Hamcor Pty Ltd v Queensland (QSC) - negligence - chemical factory fire - contamination of land by water applied by fire brigade mixed with chemicals - claims against fire brigade and insurance brokers failed
D Enterprises (Qld) Pty Ltd v Staedtler (Pacific) Pty Ltd (QSC) - corporations - winding up - statutory demand not set aside
Summaries With Link (Five Minute Read)
Jackson Lalic Lawyers Pty Ltd v Attwells [2014] NSWCA 335
Court of Appeal of New South Wales
Bathurst CJ; Meagher & Ward JJA
Negligence - solicitors' duties - advocates' immunity - separate question - respondents claimed law firm gave negligent advice when representing them in guarantee proceedings - advice led to settlement of proceedings by consent - law firm appealed against primary judge's decision to decline to answer separate question whether advocates' immunity from suit was complete answer to negligence claim - held: primary judge erred in declining to answer separate question - reasons given for refusal to answer question were irrelevant - in circumstances where alleged breach was clearly defined and agreed upon it was appropriate to answer separate question - advice fell within scope of advocates' immunity as it led to guarantee proceedings being settled and was therefore intimately connected with those proceedings - negligence proceedings would involve re-agitation of issues in guarantee proceedings and would offend principle of finality - appeal allowed - judgment for law firm in negligence proceedings.
Jackson Lalic Lawyers Pty Ltd
Hamcor Pty Ltd v Queensland [2014] QSC 224
Supreme Court of Queensland
Dalton J
Negligence - fire in plaintiffs' chemical factory - water used by fire brigade to douse fire became mixed with chemicals and soaked onto plaintiffs' land contaminating it - cost of remediation accepted to be more than $9 million which was many times more than value of land - plaintiffs sued State in negligence for acts and omissions of fire brigade - plaintiffs' property insurers had paid plaintiffs full amount for which they were insured but refused to pay on policy in name of company which ran business of factory - plaintiffs sued insurance brokers who had arranged liability insurance for company for pure economic loss - held: State owed duty to plaintiffs to take reasonable care not to damage property when acting to combat fire and hazardous materials emergency on plaintiffs' land - fire brigade breached its duty to plaintiffs in applying large amounts of water to certain areas of the land - application of water fell within s129(1) Fire and Rescue Service Act 1990 (Qld) Act with consequence fire brigade had immunity - brokers owed no duty of care to plaintiffs - plaintiffs' alternative claims against brokers under s912A(1)(a) Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) and s12ED(1)(a) Australian Securities and Investments Commission Act 2001 (Cth) also failed - judgment for defendants.
Hamcor Pty Ltd
D Enterprises (Qld) Pty Ltd v Staedtler (Pacific) Pty Ltd [2014] QSC 237
Supreme Court of Queensland
McMeekin J
Corporations - winding up - statutory demand - respondent supplied stationary to applicant - respondent issued statutory demand pursuant to s459E Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) for amount outstanding for goods supplied - applicant sought to set aside demand - applicant contended respondent induced contract by misleading representations and that there was a genuine dispute about the debt owed - held: applicant failed to discharge onus of demonstrating that there was a genuine dispute, or that it had an offsetting claim for an amount that would reduce the debt to less than the statutory minimum of $2,000 - defect in affidavit material accompanying the statutory demand did not invalidate it - demand not set aside - further submissions to be made on appropriate orders.
D Enterprises (Qld) Pty Ltd

Love and Friendship
Emily Bronte

Love is like the wild rose-briar,
Friendship like the holly-tree-
The holly is dark when the rose-briar blooms
But which will bloom most constantly?

The wild rose-briar is sweet in spring,
Its summer blossoms scent the air;
Yet wait till winter comes again
And who will call the wild-briar fair?

Then scorn the silly rose-wreath now
And deck thee with the holly's sheen,
That when December blights thy brow
He still may leave thy garland green.

Emily Bronte
Subscribe to Benchmark

Did you receive this email from a friend? Subscribe now to receive the daily edition first hand.

Subscribe to Benchmark
Feedback

Do you have comments regarding Benchmark? We're always interested to hear feedback.

Provide feedback
Sent By

AR Conolly & Company
Level 11, 275 George Street
Sydney NSW 2000

Company Website

If Benchmark is appearing in your junk folder you can fix that here.
Unsubscribe from Benchmark • Update subscription details