Marriott Industries Pty Ltd v Mercantile Credits Ltd

Marriott Industries Pty Ltd sought special leave to appeal to the High Court of Australia from a decision of the Full Court of South Australia. The dispute concerned the enforcement of a lien under the *Workmen's Liens Act 1893* (SA). The applicant had been successful at first instance before Prior J, but this decision was overturned by the Full Court. The applicant argued that special leave was warranted due to a conflict between the Full Court of South Australia's decision and a decision of the Full Court of the Northern Territory, and also due to a conflict with earlier decisions of the Full Court of South Australia itself.

The primary legal issue before the High Court was the construction of the *Workmen's Liens Act 1893* (SA), particularly sections 5 and 10, and whether the Act precluded the existence of an equitable lien arising from unjust enrichment principles. The applicant sought to enforce a lien under section 5 of the Act, which they contended was not effective or enforceable due to technical shortcomings in its registration under section 10. The applicant had dropped an argument based on agency and was not pressing an unjust enrichment claim as an independent basis for special leave, intending to rely on it only as a companion to the lien point if successful on that ground.

The applicant's counsel explained that the Full Court of South Australia had, in essence, followed a line of reasoning from single judges of the Supreme Court of South Australia in construing section 10 of the Act. The applicant's case for special leave rested on the public interest in the High Court resolving conflicting decisions of state Full Courts concerning legislation that had identical provisions in South Australia and the Northern Territory, and substantially similar provisions in Queensland. The court was concerned solely with the construction of the Act.