Jones v Mortgage Acceptance Nominees Ltd

This case involved a dispute between Griffith Morgan Jones and others (the applicants) and Mortgage Acceptance Nominees Limited and others (the respondents). The applicants sought damages and an account of profits against the respondents for breach of fiduciary duty and negligence. The respondents, in turn, filed cross-claims against the applicants and other respondents. The case was heard by Davies J in the Federal Court of Australia. The legal issues in this case centered around the right to contribution by the respondents and the entitlement to an account of profits against the respondents. The court had to decide whether the respondents could obtain contribution under section 5 of the Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1946 (NSW) or under the principles of equitable contribution. The applicants argued that the respondents should be liable for breach of fiduciary duty, while the respondents argued that the applicants' claims should be dismissed.

Davies J found that the respondents were liable for breach of fiduciary duty, but not for negligence. The court considered the meaning of "liable" in section 5(1)(c) of the Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act and held that the approach taken in the Supreme Court of New South Wales was the appropriate one. The court found that the respondents were entitled to an order for contribution under section 5(1) of the Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act and that, if the court were wrong in its view, the respondents would be entitled to contribution under the principles of the common law and of equity. The court also found that an order for an account of profits against the respondents would amount to double counting and that the applicants must elect between compensatory damages and an inquiry as to profits.

Final orders were made for the respondents to pay damages to the applicants, and the cross-claims by the respondents were dismissed.