Brown v Jammal

In *Brown v Jammal* [1995] NSWCA 62, the New South Wales Court of Appeal considered a dispute between the appellant, Brown, and the respondent, Jammal. The case concerned an appeal against a decision of the primary judge.

The central legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether the primary judge had erred in finding that the respondent had established a claim for negligent misstatement. Specifically, the court had to determine if the respondent had proven that the appellant owed them a duty of care, that the appellant breached that duty by making a negligent misstatement, and that the respondent suffered loss as a result of relying on that misstatement.

The Court of Appeal analysed the elements of negligent misstatement, referencing established legal principles regarding the circumstances in which a duty of care arises in the context of providing information or advice. The court examined the evidence presented at trial to assess whether the respondent had discharged the onus of proving each of the necessary elements of the tort.

The Court of Appeal ultimately dismissed the appeal, upholding the primary judge's finding that the respondent had successfully established a claim for negligent misstatement. The court found no error in the primary judge's application of the relevant legal principles to the facts of the case.