Harrison v Schipp

CITATION:	HARRISON & ORS v SCHIPP & ORS [1999] NSWCA 443 revised - 06/12/99
FILE NUMBER(S):	CA 40728/98
HEARING DATE(S):	1 November 1999
JUDGMENT DATE:	3 December 1999
PARTIES :	GEORGE HARRISON & ORS v DELCIE JOAN SCHIPP & ORS
JUDGMENT OF:	Mason P at 1

LOWER COURT JURISDICTION:	Supreme Court
LOWER COURT FILE NUMBER(S) :	EQ 6425/91
LOWER COURT JUDICIAL OFFICER:	Einstein J

COUNSEL:	1st Claimant: C J Birch SC and M G Stubbs 2nd Claimant: Mr Cameron in person Opponent: J Hennessy Intervener: M J Neil QC
SOLICITORS:	1st Claimant: James Solicitors 2nd Claimant: D Cameron Opponent: Barker Gosling
CATCHWORDS:	Application for stay - examination summons - allegation that issued for improper purpose - open justice - solicitor's duties
DECISION:	Dismissed with costs

THE SUPREME COURT
OF NEW SOUTH WALES
COURT OF APPEAL

CA 40728/98
EQ 6425/91


MASON P

Friday 3 December 1999



GEORGE HARRISON & ORS v DELCIE JOAN SCHIPP & ORS

JUDGMENT

1 MASON P: Mrs Schipp brought proceedings in the Equity Division against seven defendants. They included Mr Cameron, a Wollongong estate agent and Mr Harrison, a Wollongong solicitor and two companies associated with them. Those four defendants (hereafter called “the claimants”) are the claimants in the application before me. 2 Mrs Schipp had invested portion of a divorce settlement in business ventures with which the claimants were associated. She lost substantial sums of money. Following lengthy proceedings, Einstein J held that Mrs Schipp had established various breaches of fiduciary duty and also, in Mr Harrison’s case, breaches of his duty as a solicitor as well as breaches of his common law duty of care. The principal judgment was given on 17 June 1998. It contains strong adverse findings as to the credibility of Messrs Cameron and Harrison. They were found to have engaged in conduct which took unfair and unconscionable advantage of Mrs Schipp’s known weakness and vulnerability. It was also found that Mr Harrison had failed as a solicitor to take reasonable care in his dealings with Mrs Schipp’s affairs. 3 After further hearings, Einstein J made final orders on 9 September 1998. He ordered that the claimants pay to the plaintiff $230,880 by way of equitable compensation plus $394,526 interest. The claimants were ordered to pay the plaintiff’s costs of the proceedings on an indemnity basis. 4 Mrs Schipp had also sued, as seventh defendant, a group of insurers that were Mr Harrison’s professional indemnity insurers. The lead defendant was Aegon Insurance Co (UK) Ltd. This claim failed and Mrs Schipp was ordered to pay the insurers’ costs. Her application for a Bullock or Sanderson order against the claimants was rejected. 5 The claimants have appealed to this Court. In addition, Mrs Schipp has filed a summons seeking leave to cross-appeal against the claimants in relation to the refusal to make a Bullock or Sanderson costs order. She has also filed a cross-appeal relating to the dismissal of her claim against Mr Harrison’s professional indemnity insurers. 6 Mr Harrison and Mr Cameron…