Innes v Commonwealth

The applicant, Mr Innes, brought proceedings against the Commonwealth of Australia seeking damages for pure economic loss. This loss allegedly arose from negligent misstatements made by officers of the Commonwealth concerning Mr Innes's entitlement to join a Commonwealth superannuation scheme. The matter came before the Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory, constituted by Murrell CJ, Penfold and Katzmann JJ.

The central legal issue before the Court was whether Mr Innes's claims were statute-barred under the *Limitation Act 1985* (ACT). This required the Court to determine when the causes of action for pure economic loss, arising from the alleged negligent misstatements, first accrued. Specifically, the Court had to consider when the loss suffered by Mr Innes became ascertainable.

The Court reasoned that for a cause of action in negligence for pure economic loss to accrue, the plaintiff must have suffered actual damage that is ascertainable. In this instance, the Court found that the loss suffered by Mr Innes was ascertainable at the time the negligent misstatements were made, as it was then that his entitlement to join the superannuation scheme was definitively determined. Therefore, the Court concluded that the applicant’s causes of action first accrued on 5 April 1993.