Legal Research
Cases
Knight v Commonwealth

Knight v Commonwealth

Case [2013] ACTSC 238 16 December 2013

Negligent Misstatement

Type to search within this case.

RAYMOND JOHN KNIGHT V COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA

[2013] ACTSC 238 (16 December 2013)

TORTS – Negligence – negligent misstatement – pure economic loss – negligent misstatement proven – common law negligence – breach of statutory duty – decided in accordance with Meredith v Commonwealth (No 2) [2013] ACTSC 221

DAMAGES – damages for negligent misstatement – where the negligent misstatement lead the plaintiff to not join a public sector superannuation fund when eligible – where subsequent competing superannuation scenarios arose as a consequence – use of competing actuarial reports in the assessment of damages in these circumstances – turns on its own facts

SUPERANNUATION – Public service funds – availability of public service superannuation funds to ‘temporary’ Commonwealth employees under the Superannuation Act 1976 (Cth)

TAXES AND DUTIES – tax on a judgment sum – whether tax liability will be assessed on a judgment sum – same approach as Guy v Commonwealth [2013] ACTSC 128 – leave granted to apply for award of additional damages if liability assessed

Limitation Act 1985 (ACT)
Superannuation Act 1976 (Cth) ss 11, 16
Superannuation Act 1990 (Cth)

Astley v Austrust Ltd (1999) 197 CLR 1
Commonwealth v Cornwell (2007) 229 CLR 519
Commissioner of Railways v Ruprecht (1979) 142 CLR 563
Daniels v Anderson (1995) 37 NSWLR 438
Duffy v Commonwealth [2013] ACTSC 239
Golden Eagle Trading Pty Ltd v Zhang (2007) 229 CLR 498
Guy v Commonwealth [2013] ACTSC 128
Haines v Bendall (1991) 172 CLR 60
JEB Fasteners Ltd v Marks, Bloom & Co (a firm) [1981] 3 All ER 289
Jones v Livox Quarries Ltd [1952] 2 QB 608
Meredith v Commonwealth (No 2) [2013] ACTSC 221
Pennington v Norris (1956) 96 CLR 10
Southern Properties (WA) Pty Ltd v Executive Director of the Department of Conservation and Land Management (2012) 42 WAR 287
Tobin v Commonwealth [2013] ACTSC 240
Watt v Bretag (1981) 27 SASR 301
Watt v Bretag (1982) 41 ALR 597

No. SC 503 of 2008

Judge: Refshauge J
Supreme Court of the ACT

Date: 16 December 2013

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE     )
  )          No. SC 503 of 2008
AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY           )

BETWEEN:RAYMOND JOHN KNIGHT

Plaintiff

AND:COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA
Defendant

ORDER

Judge:  Refshauge J
Date:  16 December 2013
Place:  Canberra

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

There be judgment for Raymond John Knight against the Commonwealth of Australia.

The parties provide appropriate material in accordance with these reasons from which the damages payable can be quantified.

The parties be heard as to costs.

This is a further case in the series of cases associated with that in which I have given judgment in Meredith v Commonwealth (No 2) [2013] ACTSC 221. The proceedings were heard together with that case and others in the series and the evidence admitted in the hearing of Meredith v Commonwealth (No 2) was admitted in the other cases, including this case. In this case, the evidence in the hearing of Tobin v Commonwealth [2013] ACTSC 240 was also admitted.

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Knight v Commonwealth

Details

AGLC: Knight v Commonwealth [2013] ACTSC 238
Case: [2013] ACTSC 238
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

This case involves a claim for damages by Raymond John Knight against the Commonwealth of Australia for negligent misstatement. Knight alleged that he was told by Commonwealth employees that he was not eligible to join a Commonwealth superannuation scheme, which led him to forgo joining such a scheme. The court had to determine whether the Commonwealth was liable for negligent misstatement, and if so, the amount of damages to be awarded. The court found that the Commonwealth was liable for negligent misstatement as the employees who told Knight he was ineligible had a duty of care towards him and breached that duty. The court held that the negligent misstatement caused Knight not to join a Commonwealth superannuation scheme, resulting in a loss of potential benefits. The court also found that the limitation period for the claim had not expired. The quantum of damages, however, could not be determined by the court as it required expert actuarial evidence. The court invited the parties to provide appropriate material, such as actuarial reports, to assist in quantifying the damages. The court further held that the damages should include a component to compensate Knight fully for any tax imposed, reserving leave for him to apply for additional damages if the award was assessed as liable to tax. The court also reduced Knight's damages by 10% due to his failure to follow up on a form that may have provided him with correct information about superannuation.

Orders