Damjanovic v York Agencies Pty Ltd

CITATION:	Damjanovic v York Agencies Pty Ltd & Ors [2003] NSWCA 222
HEARING DATE(S):	7/08/03
JUDGMENT DATE:	10 September 2003
JUDGMENT OF:	Meagher JA at 1; Beazley JA at 2; James J at 3
DECISION:	Appeal dismissed with costs
CATCHWORDS:	Appeal from findings of fact by trial judge - ND
LEGISLATION CITED:	Bankruptcy Act 1966 (C'th), s153(1) & (2) District Court Rules, PtIIA r 3 Evidence Act 1995, s140(2)
CASES CITED:	Briginshaw v Briginshaw (1938) 60 CLR 336 Damjanovic v Maley (2002) 55 NSWLR 149 Damjanovic v Sharpe Hume & Co (CA 23/11/01) Fox v Percy (2003) 77 ALJR 989
PARTIES :	Mojmir Damjanovic (Appellant) York Agencies Py Ltd Sharpe Hume & Co (Services) Pty Ltd Peter William Rosier Jeffrey James Meads Frank Bronco Zobec Ivan Spehar Zelka Spehar (Respondents)
FILE NUMBER(S):	CA 41124/02
COUNSEL:	In Person - Appellant P Rosier, solicitor (1,3,5-7) N Gye (2 and 4) - Respondents
SOLICITORS:	In Person - Appellant Rosier Partners - Respondents

LOWER COURTJURISDICTION:	District Court
LOWER COURT FILE NUMBER(S):	2408/00; 2409/00; 2410/00; 4293/00; 3930/99
LOWER COURT JUDICIAL OFFICER :	Sorby DCJ

41124/02

MEAGHER JA
BEAZLEY JA
JAMES J

Wednesday 10 September 2003

MOJMIR DAMJANOVIC v YORK AGENCIES PTY LTD & Ors

JUDGMENT

1 MEAGHER JA: I agree with James J.

2 BEAZLEY JA: I agree with James J.

3 JAMES J: This is an appeal by Mojmir Damjanovic from a decision of his Honour Judge Sorby given in the District Court on 8 November 2002 in five actions in the District Court, all of which had been brought by Mr Damjanovic as the plaintiff. The five District Court actions were commenced in the Parramatta District Court but were later transferred to the Sydney District Court and it will be convenient to refer to them by the court numbers they were allocated upon being transferred to the Sydney District Court.

4 The respondents to the appeal are the parties who were the defendants in the five District Court actions. The first respondent York Agencies Pty Ltd, an investment company, was the defendant in action No. 2408/00. The second respondent Sharpe Hume & Co (Services) Pty Ltd, a company providing accountancy services, was the defendant in action No. 2409/00. The third respondent Peter William Rosier, a solicitor, and the fourth respondent Jeffrey James Meads and the fifth respondent Frank Bronco Zobec, both of whom were associated with the second respondent, were the defendants in action No. 2410/00. The sixth respondent Ivan Spehar was the defendant in action No. 4293/00 and the seventh respondent his wife Zelka Spehar was the defendant in action No. 3930/99. On the hearing of the appeal Mr Gye of counsel appeared for the second and fourth respondents and Mr Rosier solicitor appeared for himself and for the first, fifth, sixth and seventh respondents.

5 Mr Damjanovic was not legally represented either at the hearing before Judge Sorby or on this appeal. In the District Court Judge Sorby gave leave to Ms Ena Vukic, who has no legal…