Boorer v HLB Mann Judd (NSW) Pty Ltd

The appeal in *Boorer v HLB Mann Judd (NSW) Pty Ltd* concerned a claim by Mr Boorer against the respondent accounting firm. Mr Boorer alleged that HLB Mann Judd had acted negligently in lodging documents with the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) which incorrectly stated that he had been appointed as a director and secretary of a company, despite him not having provided the requisite written consents. Mr Boorer further contended that ASIC's subsequent disqualification of him from managing corporations, based in part on these incorrect forms, caused him loss. The primary judge had found that Mr Boorer had instructed the accountant to lodge the forms without first obtaining written consents, and therefore found no breach of duty and no loss suffered by Mr Boorer.

The legal issues before the Court of Appeal were whether the primary judge erred in finding that HLB Mann Judd had not breached its duty of care to Mr Boorer, and whether the primary judge erred in finding that Mr Boorer had suffered no loss. Mr Boorer also sought leave to amend his notice of appeal at the hearing.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, upholding the primary judge's findings. The Court reasoned that even if there had been a breach of duty by HLB Mann Judd, Mr Boorer had not established that he suffered any loss as a result of the lodgement of the incorrect forms. The Australian Administrative Tribunal (AAT) had imposed a period of disqualification on Mr Boorer for other deficiencies, and this disqualification was separate from the issue of the incorrectly lodged forms. Furthermore, the Court refused leave to amend the notice of appeal due to prejudice to the respondent and unexplained delay.

Consequently, the appeal was dismissed with costs.