Quinlan v Rothwell

[2008] QSC 143

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

Quinlan v Rothwell & Anor [2008] QSC 143

PARTIES:

DANIEL BRIAN QUINLAN
(plaintiff)
v
GARRY ST CLAIR ROTHWELL
(first defendant)
and
AUSTRALIAN INSTITUTE OF VALUERS AND LAND ADMINISTRATORS INCORPORATED
(second defendant)

FILE NO:

1683 of 1990

DIVISION:

Trial Division

PROCEEDING:

Civil Trial

ORIGINATING COURT:

Supreme Court at Queensland

DELIVERED ON:

22 May 2008

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

12 May 2008

JUDGE:

Chesterman J

ORDER:

1.          The plaintiff’s application for leave to proceed is refused

2.          The action be struck out

CATCHWORDS:

PROCEDURE – SUPREME COURT PROCEDURE – QUEENSLAND – PROCEDURE UNDER RULES OF THE COURT – TIME DELAY SINCE LAST PROCEEDING – whether plaintiff’s explanation for time delay reasonable – whether prejudice suffered by defendants as a result of delay – whether action should be struck out

Legislation
Defamation Act 1889
Uniform Civil Procedure Rules (5)(3), 155(2), 155, 211(2), 214(1)(b), 280

Cases
Brisbane South Regional Health Authority v Taylor (1996) 186 CLR 541
Dunseath v Febriway Pty Ltd (2001) QCA 104
Cooper v Hopgood and Ganim 1999 2 Qd R 115
Page v The Central Queensland University (2006) QCA 478

General Credits Limited v Whiting 1970 QWN; 32
Ladbrolli Pty Ltd v Lloyd’s Bank NZI Ltd (unreported White M 9 November 1990)

COUNSEL:

Mr P Favell for the plaintiff
Mr P Applegarth SC for the first and second defendants

SOLICITORS:

Tucker and Cowen for the plaintiff
Minter Ellison for the first and second defendants

1. The plaintiff is a valuer by profession.  In March 1988 he prepared a written valuation of two parcels of land located to the south of Coffs Harbour in New South Wales.  One parcel, having an area of 594 hectares, was described as having potential for development into a ‘major integrated resort’ and was designated ‘tourist land’ in the valuation.  The second parcel had an area of about 408 hectares and was designated ‘forest land’ (together “the Bonville land”).  In May 1987

   
   

   APM Forests Pty Ltd had sole the Bonville land to Bonville Hardwoods Ltd (‘Bonville’) for a price of $4,724,000.

1. The plaintiff valued the tourist land ‘as is’, with its then current local authority zoning and development restrictions, at $17,000,000.  With rezoning to allow resort development it was valued at $27,000,000.  The forest land was valued separately at $8,772,000. 

1. On 16 and 17 October 1990 the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (‘ABC’) telecast in New South Wales and Queensland respectively a current affairs program part of which was an account of dealings with the Bonville land by Bonville.  The company was controlled by Mr Robert Johnson.  The thrust of the report was that the New South Wales Investment Corporation which had lent Bonville some $4,000,000 to assist it to obtain development approval and develop the Bonville land for residential, commercial and industrial purposes, forgave the loan and extinguished the debt in return for the issue of shares in Bonville.  Its decision in that regard was based on the plaintiff’s valuation of the land, showing it had substantial worth.  The transaction increased Mr…