McLachlan v Sydney Trains

The case of McLachlan v Sydney Trains was heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The plaintiff, McLachlan, brought an action against Sydney Trains seeking to enforce a contract that had purportedly been formed through an offer to settle a workers' compensation claim. The central dispute was whether a contract had been formed when the plaintiff accepted the offer but specified a different deemed date of injury than that set out in the offer.

The primary legal issue for the court to determine was whether the acceptance by McLachlan, which varied the key term of the deemed date of injury, constituted a valid acceptance of the offer made by Sydney Trains. Further, the court needed to address whether the offer itself was based on a mistake, specifically an error in the calculation of whole person impairment, and if so, whether this would entitle McLachlan to equitable relief under principles established in cases such as Taylor v Johnson and Harvey v Phillips.

The court found that the acceptance by McLachlan did not constitute a valid acceptance of Sydney Trains' offer because the acceptance varied a material term, namely the deemed date of injury. Consequently, there was no meeting of the minds required to form a binding contract. Regarding the second issue, the court determined that the offer was indeed based on an error in the calculation of whole person impairment. However, the court held that equitable relief was not available because McLachlan had not demonstrated a sufficient basis for relief under the circumstances of this case. Thus, the court dismissed McLachlan's claim in its entirety.

No further orders were made by the court beyond the dismissal of McLachlan's claim.