GERRARD & ANOR -v- SLAMAR [2004] WASCA 253 (S)

Jurisdiction:	SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA	Citation No:	[2004] WASCA 253 (S)
Court:	THE FULL COURT (WA)	Published:	16/03/2005
Case No:	FUL:117/2002	Heard:	21 APRIL 2004 & 18 FEBRUARY 2005
Coram:	STEYTLER J EM HEENAN J LE MIERE J	Delivered:	12/11/04
Supplementary Delivered:	18/02/05
No of pages:	13	Judgment Part:	1 of 1
Result:	Leave to amend grounds of appeal granted Appeal allowed Judgment varied No order as to costs
Category:	B
PDF Version

Parties:	JOHN WILLIAM GERRARD LINDA ROSE GERRARD TROY RUDOLPH HERBERT SLAMAR
Catchwords:	Appeal Application for leave to amend grounds of appeal after hearing Damages Bailment Improvement of bailed chattel due to actions of bailee Bailor recovering improved value of chattel in claim for damages for destruction of bailed goods while in possession of bailee Obligation of bailor to pay repair charges for the work resulting in improvement in value of chattel Costs Local Court scale
Legislation:	District Court Act 1969 Local Courts Act, s 17 Rules of the Supreme Court, O 66 r 16 Supreme Court Act 1935
Case References:	Calderbank v Calderbank [1976] Fam 93; [1975] 3 All ER 333 Electricity Trust of South Australia v O'Leary (1986) 42 SASR 26 Gerrard & Anor v Slamar [2004] WASCA 253 Green v Sommerville (1979) 141 CLR 594 Greenwood v Bennett [1973] QB 195 Jones v The Queen (1989) 166 CLR 409 McKeown v Cavalier Yachts Pty Ltd (1988) 13 NSWLR 303 Munro v Wilmott [1949] 1 KB 295 Nash v Barnes [1922] NZLR 303 National Australia Bank Ltd v Bond Brewing Holdings [1991] 1 VLR 386 Re Simms [1934] 1 Ch 1 Suttor v Gundowda Pty Ltd (1950) 81 CLR 418 Tom Hopkins Inc v Wall & Redekopf Realty Inc [1985] 6 WWR 367 University of Woollongong & Ors v Metwally (No 2) (1985) 59 ALJR 481 Water Board v Moustakas (1988) 180 CLR 491 Dearman v Dearman (1908) 7 CLR 549 Steele v Tardiani (1946) 72 CLR 386

JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA TITLE OF COURT : THE FULL COURT (WA) CITATION : GERRARD & ANOR -v- SLAMAR [2004] WASCA 253 (S) CORAM : STEYTLER J

EM HEENAN J

LE MIERE J

HEARD : 21 APRIL 2004 & 18 FEBRUARY 2005 DELIVERED : 12 NOVEMBER 2004 SUPPLEMENTARY
DECISION : 18 FEBRUARY 2005 PUBLISHED : 16 MARCH 2005 FILE NO/S : FUL 117 of 2002 BETWEEN : JOHN WILLIAM GERRARD

LINDA ROSE GERRARD

Appellants (Defendants)

AND

TROY RUDOLPH HERBERT SLAMAR

Respondent (Plaintiff)

Catchwords:

Appeal - Application for leave to amend grounds of appeal after hearing - Damages - Bailment - Improvement of bailed chattel due to actions of bailee - Bailor recovering improved value of chattel in claim for damages for destruction of bailed goods while in possession of bailee - Obligation of bailor to pay repair charges for the work resulting in improvement in value of chattel - Costs - Local Court scale

(Page 2)

Legislation:

District Court Act 1969

Local Courts Act,…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Gerrard & Anor v Slamar

Details

AGLC: Gerrard & Anor v Slamar [2004] WASCA 253 (S)
Case: [2004] WASCA 253 (S)
Decision Date: 16 MARCH 2005

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Gerrard & Anor v Slamar is a case involving an appeal against a decision made in the Local Court of New South Wales. The dispute centres on the destruction of goods while in the possession of a bailee, with the plaintiffs, Gerrard and another party, seeking damages for the loss of their property. The defendant, Slamar, is the bailee who was entrusted with the care of the plaintiffs' goods. The matter was heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales.

The legal issues before the court included whether the plaintiffs were entitled to recover the improved value of the bailed chattel due to actions taken by the bailee, and whether the plaintiffs were obligated to pay for the repair charges associated with the improvement of the chattel. Additionally, the court needed to determine the appropriate scale of costs to be awarded under the Local Court scale.

In reaching its decision, the court noted that the plaintiffs were indeed entitled to recover the improved value of the bailed chattel due to the actions of the bailee. The court held that the bailee's actions in improving the chattel constituted a wrongful act, and as a result, the plaintiffs were entitled to the enhanced value of the chattel at the time of its destruction. However, the court also determined that the plaintiffs were not required to pay for the repair charges associated with the improvement, as these charges were a consequence of the bailee's wrongful act. The court granted leave to amend the grounds of appeal, allowed the appeal, and varied the judgment. No order was made as to costs.

Orders

Orders of the court

Leave to amend grounds of appeal granted

Appeal allowed

Judgment varied

No order as to costs

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.