| In the matter of Urban Purveyor Group Pty Ltd (NSWSC) - corporations - statutory demand varied by amounts in respect of which there was a genuine dispute |
| Wilson v Building Commission of Victoria (VSC) - building and construction - conviction for carrying out work without building permit - dismissal of application to commence judicial review proceedings - appeal dismissed |
| Gunns Ltd v State of Tasmania (TASSC) - negligence - claim against State in relation to handling of water licence application - causes of action in negligence, negligent misstatement and estoppel failed |
| |
|
|
|
| ANZIIF General Insurance Breakfast |
|
| Now in its 27th year, the ANZIIF General Insurance Breakfast brings together a panel of insurance experts to speak about where the market is today and the future of the industry. |
|
|
|
|
|
| Summaries With Link (Five Minute Read) |
In the matter of Urban Purveyor Group Pty Ltd [2015] NSWSC 1705
Supreme Court of New South Wales
Bergin CJ in Eq
Corporations - statutory demand - plaintiff pursuant to 459H(4) Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) sought that statutory demand issued by defendant be varied by reducing amount claimed - plaintiff also sought declaration pursuant to ss459F(2) & 459H(4) that statutory demand had effect, as varied, from date it was served on plaintiff -plaintiff contended there was genuine dispute about amount of debt relating to two aspects of claims made in invoices - first aspect was that amounts claimed were outside agreed rates - the second aspect was that some services listed in invoices had to be approved by plaintiff and weren’t approved - held: statutory demand varied by reducing it to take into account and arithmetical error, and genuine disputes in respect of both the overcharging claim and the unauthorised work claim - statutory demand varied.
Urban Purveyor Group
|
Wilson v Building Commission of Victoria [2015] VSC 629
Supreme Court of Victoria
John Dixon J
Building and construction - judicial review - appellant convicted of carrying out work without building permit contrary to s16(1) Building Act 1993 (Vic) - appellant sought to appeal in County Court but filed appeal out of time - County Court judge refused leave to appeal - appellant wrote to Court enclosing judicial review application - registry informed appellant he was out of time, which would need to be addressed in his application- appellant successfully filed application for judicial review more than 28 months out of time - associate judge refused application - appellant appealed under r77.06 Supreme Court (General Civil Procedure Rules) 2005 (Vic) - held: appellant did not demonstrate error by associate judge in identification of proper test or application and consideration of relevant factors in relation to establishment of “special circumstances”- error not demonstrated in associate judge’s decision - appeal dismissed.
Wilson
|
Gunns Ltd v State of Tasmania [2015] TASSC 52
Supreme Court of Tasmania
Pearce J
Negligence - plaintiff applied under Water Management Act 1999 (Tas) to build dam on to irrigate a planned vineyard development for its business - plaintiff sought licence to take water for dam from watercourse - dam permit was approved - dam constructed - plaintiff notified that without further information it would be allocated less water than amount it had applied - plaintiff claimed damages against State arising from the manner in which water licence application dealt with - held: defendant did not owe duty of care to plaintiff - causes of action in negligence, negligent misstatement and estoppel failed - action dismissed.
Gunns
|
