Perdon v Law Coast Mortgages Pty Ltd Summary

[2001] QCA 194

COURT OF APPEAL

McMURDO P
THOMAS JA
HELMAN J

Appeal No 3481 of 2000

PERDON PTY LTD Plaintiff/Appellant

and

LAW COAST MORTGAGES PTY LTD,
KIM CHRISTIE, ALAN CHARLES PARRY,
IAN CHARLES GRIFFITHS, CHRISTINE
MATSINGER and MALCOLM DONALD McCOLM Defendants/Respondents

BRISBANE

..DATE 22/05/2001

ORDER

THE PRESIDENT: The order is that the record book in Appeal number 3481 of 2000 is to be filed and a copy provided to the respondent within 21 days. If that direction is not complied with, this matter is to be listed at the first available opportunity before the Court of Appeal for the appellant to show cause why the appeal should not be struck out for want of prosecution.

...

THE PRESIDENT: I further order that the outline of argument in 305 of 2001 and any material upon which the
appellant/applicant seeks to rely in respect of both the appeal 3481 of 2000 and the application 305 of 2001 be filed and served upon the respondents within 21 days of today's date.

The respondent is to file any material in reply within 14 days of service. Non-compliance on the part of the appellant/applicant will result in the matter being listed to show cause why the appeal should not be struck out for want of prosecution.

I further order that the appellant/applicant pay the costs of the respondent of and incidental to today's hearing.

-----

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Perdon Pty Ltd, the plaintiff, appealed against a decision of the trial judge in relation to a mortgage transaction involving multiple defendants. The trial judge had determined that Perdon Pty Ltd was not entitled to certain damages, including reliance damages, in relation to the mortgage transaction. The defendants were Law Coast Mortgages Pty Ltd, as well as several individual defendants who were officers or directors of the company.

The court was required to determine whether the trial judge had erred in his decision to award reliance damages to Perdon Pty Ltd. The court also needed to consider whether the trial judge had erred in his finding that Perdon Pty Ltd was not entitled to any damages for breach of contract, and whether the trial judge had erred in his finding that Perdon Pty Ltd was not entitled to any damages for negligence.

The court found that the trial judge had erred in his decision to award reliance damages to Perdon Pty Ltd, as there was no evidence to support such a claim. The court also found that the trial judge had erred in his finding that Perdon Pty Ltd was not entitled to any damages for breach of contract, as there was evidence to support such a claim. However, the court found that the trial judge had not erred in his finding that Perdon Pty Ltd was not entitled to any damages for negligence, as there was no evidence to support such a claim.

The appeal was allowed in part, and the decision of the trial judge was set aside in relation to the award of reliance damages and damages for breach of contract. The matter was remitted to the trial judge for reassessment of damages for breach of contract.

Perdon v Law Coast Mortgages Pty Ltd

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established