Daily Insurance: Wednesday, 6 May 2015 View in browser

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

Daily Insurance

Listen to our daily executive summary – 120 seconds
Executive Summary (One Minute Read)
Philip v JPM Developments Pty Ltd (NSWSC) - judgments and orders - declaratory and injunctive orders - costs order against non-party
Haritos v Commissioner of Taxation (VSCA) - declaratory relief - pleadings - beneficial ownership of shares in company - appeal dismissed
Haque v State of Victoria (VSCA) - false imprisonment - defamation - no real prospects of success on appeal - leave to appeal refused
Mules v Ferguson (QCA) - damages - appellant successful on appeal - interest on damages payable from date of judgment in Court of Appeal, not from date of judgment at first instance
Summaries With Link (Five Minute Read)
Philip v JPM Developments Pty Ltd [2015] NSWSC 495
Supreme Court of New South Wales
Sackar J
Judgments and orders - costs against non-party - Court gave judgment in proceedings - parties submitted proposed declaratory and injunctive orders - plaintiff also claimed sole director and shareholder of defendant be responsible for costs of litigation in event defendant was unable to pay - defendant accepted that as unsuccessful party it should pay costs on ordinary basis - s98(1) Civil Procedure Act 2005 - held: proposed orders too broad and did not reflect way in which case conducted and decided - form of orders restricted - Court satisfied in circumstances that director should be responsible for costs of proceedings if defendant unable to pay
Haritos v Commissioner of Taxation [2015] VSCA 79
Court of Appeal of Victoria
Osborn, Ferguson & Kaye JJA
Declaratory relief - pleadings - primary judge granted Commissioner declaration that fourth defendant was beneficial owner of shares in company - primary judge also made further declaration that purported declarations of trust made by appellants with respect to the shares were void, invalid and of no effect - appellants contended trial judge failed to properly take into account evidence of an accountant in respect of first declaration - held: Court not persuaded primary judge relevantly disregarded evidence in issue, nor that it established error in conclusions - primary judge did not err in refusing leave to further amend defence - appeal dismissed.
Haque v State of Victoria [2015] VSCA 83
Court of Appeal of Victoria
Osborn & Beach JJA
False imprisonment - defamation - applicant sued State alleging causes of action in assault, battery, false imprisonment and defamation - County Court dismissed proceeding and entered judgment for State - applicant sought leave to appeal - held: no error in primary judge’s acceptance of constable’s evidence that he told applicant he was being arrested pursuant to outstanding warrant - no error in conclusions that arrest warrant valid and outstanding and that arrest neither wrongful nor unlawful - ss461(1) & 461(2) Crimes Act 1958 did not operate to make arrest unlawful - no error in conclusion it was reasonable for police to place applicant in handcuffs - no error in dismissal of defamation claim or in fact-finding analysis - grounds of appeal without merit - Court not satisfied appeal had real prospect of success - leave to appeal refused.
Mules v Ferguson [2015] QCA 77
Court of Appeal of Queensland
M McMurdo P, Applegarth & Boddice JJ
Damages - interest on judgment sum - Court allowed appellant’s appeal - Court entered judgment for appellant in amount of damages assessed by trial judge “together with interests thereon” - appellant contended interest payable on entire judgment sum calculated from date of judgment at first instance - ss58(3) & 59(2) Civil Proceedings Act 2011 - held: appellant had failed at first instance - appellant had received benefit of substantial award of damages as consequence of successful appeal - nothing in respondent’s conduct or appellant’s circumstances justified judgment operating from date of initial determination such that respondent would suffer consequence of having to pay significant additional sum of interest - interest should only be payable from date on which judgment in appellant’s favour pronounced in Court of Appeal.