PISANO -v- HEALTH SOLUTIONS (WA) PTY LTD [2014] WASC 356 (S)
| SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA | Citation No: | [2014] WASC 356 (S) | |
| Case No: | CIV:1213/2013 | 26 SEPTEMBER 2014 AND ON THE PAPERS | |
| Coram: | McKECHNIE J | 6/11/14 | |
| 4 | Judgment Part: | 1 of 1 | |
| Result: | Judgment for the defendants with costs | ||
| B | |||
| PDF Version |
| Parties: | GIGLIETTO PISANO HEALTH SOLUTIONS (WA) PTY LTD RAMSAY HEALTH CARE AUSTRALIA PTY LTD |
Catchwords: | Practice and procedure Defendants successful on preliminary point Whether entitled to judgment Whether entitled to costs |
Legislation: | Nil |
Case References: | Nil |
JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA
- IN CIVIL
- Plaintiff
AND
HEALTH SOLUTIONS (WA) PTY LTD
Defendant
- Plaintiff
AND
RAMSAY HEALTH CARE AUSTRALIA PTY LTD
Defendant
Catchwords:
Practice and procedure - Defendants successful on preliminary point - Whether entitled to judgment - Whether entitled to costs
Legislation:
Nil
Result:
Judgment for the defendants with costs
Category: B
Representation:
CIV 1213 of 2013
Counsel:
Plaintiff : Mr C P Stokes
Defendant : Mr M L Bennett
Solicitors:
Plaintiff : Chris Stokes & Associates
Defendant : DLA Piper Australia
CIV 2930 of 2013
Counsel:
Plaintiff : Mr C P Stokes
Defendant : Mr P J Hannan
Solicitors:
Plaintiff : Chris Stokes & Associates
Defendant : DLA Piper Australia
Case(s) referred to in judgment(s):
Nil
1 McKECHNIE J: The answers to the issues as summarised by counsel for Mr Pisano [7] means that he has effectively lost the action. The terms upon which Mr Pisano sets store were not accepted as implied into the agreement.
2 The attempt to seek a declaration and remit the action for trial is pointless.
3 At the trial counsel for the plaintiff, Mr McGowan, acknowledged that if my findings were against the plaintiff the matter would come to an end. This was a fair and proper concession. When my reasons were delivered, Mr Stokes submitted that the plaintiff was partially successful and partially unsuccessful in relation to the issue of implied terms.
4 However, the plaintiff failed to establish that the terms contended by him formed part of any contract.
5 The agreement which I found to exist was one which Health Solutions did not really dispute, although Ramsey Health Care did.
6 Without the implied terms it does not give the plaintiff any claim for the pleaded injunction or damages.
7 The action must be dismissed and judgment entered for the defendants.
Costs
8 Consistent with his contention for a declaration and remitter for trial, Mr Stokes argued that costs should be in the cause.
9 Even if I was remitting the matter I would not make such an order.
10 The normal result is that costs follow the event. The event in question is Mr Pisano's effective loss on the issue he advanced. Health Solutions succeeded in the argument it advanced. Whilst Ramsey Health Care's arguments were not accepted, it is effectively a winning party. Its interests were not identical to Health Solutions and it was proper that it was separately represented.
11 Although unsuccessful, Ramsay Health Care's submissions were fairly arguable. They did not occupy much time.
Result
12 The plaintiff's actions are dismissed and judgment entered for the defendants with costs.
- AGLC
- Pisano v Health Solutions (WA) Pty Ltd [2014] WASC 356 (S)
- Case
- [2014] WASC 356 (S)
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issue was whether the defendants were entitled to judgment as a matter of law or on the basis of the evidence presented. The plaintiff argued that the defendants had breached their contractual obligations and engaged in misleading and deceptive conduct. However, the court found that the plaintiff had not presented sufficient evidence to substantiate their claims. The court held that the plaintiff's case was not made out on the evidence, and the defendants were entitled to judgment.
The court's reasoning was based on the plaintiff's failure to provide adequate evidence to support their claims. The plaintiff's expert witness was unable to provide reliable evidence, and the court found that the plaintiff's claims were speculative and not supported by the evidence presented. The court held that the plaintiff had not discharged the onus of proof, and the defendants were entitled to judgment as a matter of law. The court also found that the defendants were entitled to costs.
As a result of the court's decision, judgment was entered in favour of the defendants, and the plaintiff's claims were dismissed. The court ordered that the defendants were entitled to costs.
Orders
Orders of the court
Judgment for the defendants with costs
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.