Legal Research
Cases
Jardine v Windsor Craig Solicitors (a Firm)

Jardine v Windsor Craig Solicitors (a Firm)

Case [2003] QCA 168

Appeal

Limitation Periods

Compensatory Damages

Civil Litigation & Procedure

No judgment structure available for this case.

Type to search within this case.

[2003] QCA 168

COURT OF APPEAL

McMURDO P
WILLIAMS JA
HOLMES J

Appeal No 1778 of 2003

TONY ALLEN JARDINE Plaintiff (The Respondent)

and

WINDSOR CRAIG SOLICITORS
(A Firm) Defendant (The Applicant)

BRISBANE

..DATE 22/04/2003

ORDER

THE PRESIDENT: This case raises an interesting and perhaps important matter, concerning the measure of damages and doubt has been raised as to the correctness of the Judge's decision, but that issue cannot be determined without a full record.

In the circumstances, it seems to be an appropriate case to grant the application for leave to appeal. The grounds of appeal to be argued, are to be limited to those contained in grounds 2A, D, E and F of the proposed notice of appeal, at A19 and A20 of the material before this Court.

The costs of this application are reserved.

-----

Details

AGLC: Jardine v Windsor Craig Solicitors (a Firm) [2003] QCA 168
Case: [2003] QCA 168
Decision Date: 22/04/2003

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Court of Appeal in this case considered an appeal by Windsor Craig Solicitors, a firm, against a decision made by a lower court in relation to a dispute with Tony Allen Jardine. The primary issue at hand was the measure of damages awarded to the plaintiff, Jardine, and the correctness of the decision made by the trial judge. The firm contested the quantum of damages and sought to appeal the decision, arguing that the trial judge had erred in his calculation.

The court examined the grounds of appeal, which were limited to specific points raised in the proposed notice of appeal. These grounds included doubts about the correctness of the trial judge's decision in relation to the measure of damages. The appeal hinged on whether the trial judge had applied the correct legal principles and exercised his discretion appropriately in determining the amount of damages awarded. The Court of Appeal noted that the issue of the correctness of the trial judge's decision could not be determined without a full record of the proceedings.

Ultimately, the Court of Appeal determined that it was an appropriate case to grant the application for leave to appeal. The appeal would be limited to the specified grounds outlined in the notice of appeal. The costs associated with the application were reserved, pending the outcome of the appeal. The case underscores the importance of ensuring that the correct legal principles are applied in determining the measure of damages in legal disputes.

Orders