Jason William Gann v Joseph Hosny

The case of Jason William Gann versus Joseph Hosny was heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The plaintiff, Mr Gann, brought an action against the defendant, Mr Hosny, seeking damages for an assault that occurred. Mr Hosny had been charged with the assault but was later released without conviction on a good behaviour bond. Mr Gann claimed to have suffered psychiatric injury as a result of the assault and sought compensation. The defendant did not defend the proceeding, resulting in a judgment for the plaintiff.

The court was required to decide whether the judgment obtained by the plaintiff was procured by fraud, specifically through perjury during the trial. The defendant argued that the plaintiff had committed perjury when giving evidence about his employment status since the assault. The defendant relied on admissions made by the plaintiff during a subsequent criminal prosecution for obtaining accident compensation payments by deception. The court had to determine whether the plaintiff's evidence was false and whether this constituted fraud in obtaining the damages judgment.

The court found that the defendant's case was deficient in multiple respects. The plaintiff's evidence regarding his employment status was not challenged at the original trial, and the defendant failed to establish that the plaintiff's evidence was false. The court concluded that the perjury was not established and that the plaintiff's evidence was credible. The court applied the principle from Wentworth v Rogers (No 5) and refused to set aside the damages judgment. The defendant's application for leave to appeal was also denied.

No further orders were made by the court. The judgment for damages awarded to Mr Gann was upheld, and the defendant's attempts to set it aside were unsuccessful.