Donkin v AGC (Advances) Ltd

Colin John Donkin and Heather Kay Donkin sought damages from AGC (Advances) Ltd for losses they claimed to have suffered as a result of, amongst other things, the negligent failure of the respondent to advise them of the steps available to them to minimise the risks of an adverse fluctuation in the rate of exchange in connection with foreign currency borrowing transactions. This application was dismissed by Beaumont J. An appeal against this judgment was dismissed by a Full Court in December 1991. An application for special leave to appeal the High Court was subsequently filed but the application was not pursued and in April 1992 it was dismissed. The applicants now seek to appeal the order made by Beaumont J and to set aside the judgment of Beaumont J insofar as it relates to the quantum of damages. The applicants contend that new evidence is now available which was not available at the time of the trial and the appeal. The Full Court was of the view that the applications should be dismissed. In the opinion of Black CJ, the Court should not exercise its jurisdiction to reopen the appeal as the public interest in the finality of litigation points very strongly against the reopening of the case. The Court was also of the view that the evidence that the applicants wish to rely upon is not fresh evidence as it was available at the time of the trial and the appeal. The Full Court held that the trial before Beaumont J was patently a fair trial and the parties were given a fair opportunity to put anything they wished to put on the question of the applicants' loss. The Full Court dismissed the applications, with costs.