Skip to content

Posts by robertsheldon

Legal professional privilege: dominant versus secondary purpose

DOUGLAS v MORGAN [2019] SASCFC 76 Legal professional privilege 41 Legal professional privilege “is a rule of substantive law which may be availed of by a person to resist the giving of information or the production of documents which would reveal communications between a client and his or her lawyer made for the dominant purpose…

Read More

Appeals – orders not reasons

11. In relation to the appellant’s principal point, that he wishes to challenge the “finding” of the court below and the statutory construction underpinning it, it is axiomatic that parties are entitled to appeal from orders made and not reasons given: Driclad Pty Ltd v Federal Commissioner of Taxation [1968] HCA 91; (1968) 121 CLR 45 at 64; [1968] HCA…

Read More

Intentional acts under the Civil Liability Act

Section 3B of the Civil Liability Act only excludes the operation of the Act where the conduct that is the subject of proceedings was intentional, and done with intent to cause injury; the Act is not excluded merely because the proceedings relate to an intentional tort: [8], [51], [169]. [8] As this Court has noted on a number…

Read More

Declaration: width

XL Insurance Co SE v BNY Trust Company of Australia Limited [2019] NSWCA 215 114 Courts will usually not make a declaration as to the liability of an insurer to indemnify an insured in circumstances where the liability of the insured to a claimant has not yet been established by judgment: AMP Financial Planning Pty Ltd…

Read More

Solicitors, fiduciary duties, retainers and contributory negligence

Rahme v Benjamin & Khoury Pty Ltd [2019] NSWCA 211 In relation to Question 1: By signing the costs agreements with B&K, Mrs Rahme agreed to pay B&K’s past and future fees for it acting on her behalf as solicitor for the plaintiffs in the Bevillesta proceedings and she agreed to give security for that…

Read More

Allowing an appeal by consent

In this regard, as the Full Court held in Bradken Limited v Norcast S.AR.L [2013] FCAFC 123;  (2013) 219 FCR 101at  [2]: … the exercise of the power to allow an appeal by consent is dependent upon the identification, to the satisfaction of the Court, of arguable appellable error in the decision below. (at [9] CQX18 v Minister for…

Read More

Availability of cross claims in apportionable claims

Landpower Australia Pty Ltd v Penske Power Systems Pty Ltd [2019] NSWCA 161 Bell P: Further consideration 39. In Hunt & Hunt Lawyers v Mitchell Morgan Nominees Pty Ltd (2013) 247 CLR 613; [2013] HCA 10 at [16], French CJ, Hayne and Kiefel JJ said: “The evident purpose of Pt 4 [of the CLA] is…

Read More

Appellate review of an award of non-economic loss

White v Redding [2019] NSWCA 152 Non-economic loss Relevant statutes and legal principles At common law, general damages for pain and suffering resulting from personal injury were “almost entirely [a] matter of impression and of common sense, and [were] only subject to review in very special cases” (Miller v Jennings [1954] HCA 65; (1954) 92…

Read More

Leave to appeal

[28] In PPK Willoughby Pty Ltd v Baird [2019] NSWCA 48, this Court made reference to the proper approach of an intermediate appellate court to applications for leave to appeal from interlocutory decisions involving the exercise of discretion on questions of practice and procedure. The Court observed (at [5]) that discretionary decisions “engage the strictures against over-ready appellate…

Read More