Ludwig v The Public Trustee - [2008] NSWCA 115

New South Wales

Court of Appeal

CITATION: Ludwig v The Public Trustee [2008] NSWCA 115

HEARING DATE(S): 17 April 2008

JUDGMENT DATE:
20 June 2008

JUDGMENT OF: Giles JA at 1; Young CJ in Eq at 102; Mathews AJA at 103

DECISION: Appeal dismissed with costs, orders taking effect 21 days after this date and judgment being taken to then to have been pronounced.

CATCHWORDS: Negligence - claim by beneficiary of negligence in administration of deceased estate - many allegations of negligence - trial judge not satisfied of negligence - numerous allegations of error in trial judge's determination - no error shown in trial judge's conclusions - no procedural unfairness, bias or other judicial misconduct - appeal failed.

CATEGORY: Principal judgment

CASES CITED: Cachia v Haines (1994) 179 CLR 403;
Hanna v Registrar of the Court of Appeal [2006] NSWSC 564;
Sarihaya v Victorian Workcover Authority [1997] FCA 132, (1997) 80 FCR 262.

PARTIES: Gunter Ludwig - Appellant
The Public Trustee - Respondent

FILE NUMBER(S): CA 40722/06

COUNSEL: Appellant in person
M Meek & D Laftsidis - Respondent

SOLICITORS: Gordon A Salier - Respondent

LOWER COURT JURISDICTION: Supreme Court - Equity Division

LOWER COURT FILE NUMBER(S): SC 2964/05

LOWER COURT JUDICIAL OFFICER: Campbell J

LOWER COURT DATE OF DECISION: 17 October 2006, 31 October 2006

LOWER COURT MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION: Ludwig v The Public Trustee [2006] NSWSC 890 (Principal judgment - 17 October 2006); Ludwig v The Public Trustee (Campbell J, 31 October 2006, unreported) (costs judgment)

CA 40722/06
ED 2964/05

GILES JA
YOUNG CJ in EQ
MATHEWS AJA
Friday 20 June 2008

LUDWIG v THE PUBLIC TRUSTEE

Judgment

1 GILES JA: By a statement of claim filed on 16 June 2005 the appellant alleged that the respondent had been negligent in the administration of the estate of his late brother Klaus-Peter Ludwig (“the deceased”). He claimed damages of $292,381.81, being $89,404.37 as set out in a letter of 13 March 2005 less an adjustment of $22.56, $173,000 for “loss of Plaintiff’s home”, and $30,000 for “inconvenience and stress”.

2 Campbell J heard the proceedings over five days in July-August 2006. His Honour gave judgment on 17 October 2006 (Ludwig v The Public Trustee [2006] NSWSC 890). He ordered that there be judgment for the appellant for $450, the amount of a calculation error acknowledged by the respondent, and that the proceedings be otherwise dismissed. In a subsequent judgment given on 31 October 2006 His Honour ordered that the appellant pay 80 per cent of the respondent’s costs of the proceedings and that the $450 be set off against the appellant’s liability for those costs.

3 For the reasons which follow, in my opinion the appeal from his Honour’s decisions should be dismissed.

Background

4 The deceased was murdered on 11 or 12 April 1996. On 24 September 1999 Alexios Spathis and Michael Patsalis were convicted for the murder, and on 23 February 2000 they were sentenced to periods of imprisonment.

5 The…

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 Ludwig v The Public Trustee

Details

AGLC: Ludwig v The Public Trustee [2008] NSWCA 115
Case: [2008] NSWCA 115
Decision Date: 20 June 2008

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The appellant, Ludwig, brought a claim against the respondent, the Public Trustee, alleging negligence in the administration of a deceased estate. The primary judge found that the appellant had not established any negligence on the part of the Public Trustee. Ludwig appealed this decision to the Court of Appeal of New South Wales.

The Court of Appeal was required to determine whether the primary judge erred in finding no negligence on the part of the Public Trustee, and whether there was any procedural unfairness, bias, or other judicial misconduct during the trial.

Giles JA, with whom Young CJ in Eq and Mathews AJA agreed, found no error in the primary judge's conclusions. The Court held that the numerous allegations of negligence made by the appellant were not substantiated. Furthermore, the Court found no evidence of procedural unfairness, bias, or any other judicial misconduct that would warrant overturning the trial judge's findings.

Consequently, the appeal was dismissed with costs.

Orders

Orders of the court

Appeal dismissed with costs, orders taking effect 21 days after this date and judgment being taken to then to have been pronounced.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.

CITATION:	Ludwig v The Public Trustee [2008] NSWCA 115
HEARING DATE(S):	17 April 2008
JUDGMENT DATE:	20 June 2008
JUDGMENT OF:	Giles JA at 1; Young CJ in Eq at 102; Mathews AJA at 103
DECISION:	Appeal dismissed with costs, orders taking effect 21 days after this date and judgment being taken to then to have been pronounced.
CATCHWORDS:	Negligence - claim by beneficiary of negligence in administration of deceased estate - many allegations of negligence - trial judge not satisfied of negligence - numerous allegations of error in trial judge's determination - no error shown in trial judge's conclusions - no procedural unfairness, bias or other judicial misconduct - appeal failed.
CATEGORY:	Principal judgment
CASES CITED:	Cachia v Haines (1994) 179 CLR 403; Hanna v Registrar of the Court of Appeal [2006] NSWSC 564; Sarihaya v Victorian Workcover Authority [1997] FCA 132, (1997) 80 FCR 262.
PARTIES:	Gunter Ludwig - Appellant The Public Trustee - Respondent
FILE NUMBER(S):	CA 40722/06
COUNSEL:	Appellant in person M Meek & D Laftsidis - Respondent
SOLICITORS:	Gordon A Salier - Respondent
LOWER COURT JURISDICTION:	Supreme Court - Equity Division
LOWER COURT FILE NUMBER(S):	SC 2964/05
LOWER COURT JUDICIAL OFFICER:	Campbell J
LOWER COURT DATE OF DECISION:	17 October 2006, 31 October 2006
LOWER COURT MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	Ludwig v The Public Trustee [2006] NSWSC 890 (Principal judgment - 17 October 2006); Ludwig v The Public Trustee (Campbell J, 31 October 2006, unreported) (costs judgment)