Baltic Shipping Company v Dillon

Case [1993] HCATrans 100


IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Office of the Registry

Sydney No S113 of 1991

B e t w e e n -

BALTIC SHIPPING COMPANY

Appellant

and

JOAN NORMA DILLON

Respondent

Consent Orders

MASON CJ
DEANE J

DAWSON J

TOOHEY J

McHUGH J

Baltic(4) 1 29/4/93

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

AT CANBERRA ON THURSDAY, 29 APRIL 1993, AT 10.22 AM

Copyright in the High Court of Australia

MASON CJ:  The Deputy Registrar certifies that she holds a

consent duly signed by the solicitors for the

parties in this matter for the making of an order

in the following terms:

1.        Appeal allowed.

2.        Order that the appellant pays 75 per cent of the respondent's costs of the appeal.

3.       Set aside the order of the Court of Appeal of

New South Wales in so far as it dismissed the appeal to that Court.

4.       In lieu of that part of the order of the Court of Appeal so set aside, make the following orders:

(i) Appeal allowed.

(ii)     Set aside so much of the judgment of Mr Justice Carruthers as ordered that the defendant, the appellant in this Court, pay to the plaintiff, the

respondent in this Court, the sum of
$51,396.

5.       Direct the parties to bring in, within 21

days, minutes of order as to the sum to be

paid by the defendant to the plaintiff in

accordance with the judgment of this Court.

6.        In lieu of so much of the judgment of

Mr Justice Carruthers referred to in

paragraph (4), judgment for the plaintiff
against the defendant in the sum of $49,497,
together with interest thereon from
20 November 1989 to the date of payment in
accordance with the Supreme Court of New South
Wales Practice Notes.
There will be orders accordingly.

AT 10.23 AM THE MATTER WAS ADJOURNED SINE DIE

Baltic(4) 2 29/4/93
Details
AGLC
Baltic Shipping Company v Dillon [1993] HCATrans 100
Case
[1993] HCATrans 100
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The High Court of Australia heard an appeal by Baltic Shipping Company against a decision concerning a dispute with a respondent, Ms. Dillon. The core of the dispute involved a judgment awarded to Ms. Dillon by Mr. Justice Carruthers, which had been partially dismissed on appeal to the Court of Appeal of New South Wales.

The High Court was required to determine the appropriate quantum of damages to be awarded to the respondent, Ms. Dillon, and to consider the allocation of costs for the appeal proceedings. This involved reviewing the original judgment and the subsequent appeal decision to ascertain the correct assessment of the respondent's entitlements.

The Court, by consent of the parties' solicitors, ordered that the appellant, Baltic Shipping Company, pay 75 per cent of the respondent's costs of the appeal. The Court also set aside the order of the Court of Appeal that had dismissed the appeal to that court. In its place, the High Court ordered that so much of the judgment of Mr. Justice Carruthers as ordered the appellant to pay a specific sum to the respondent be set aside. The parties were directed to submit minutes of order within 21 days regarding the final sum to be paid by the appellant to the respondent, reflecting a judgment for the respondent in the sum of $49,497, plus interest.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.