Talacko v Talacko

The case involved an appeal and cross-appeals concerning an unlawful means conspiracy. The appellant, Judith, argued that no loss or damage had been suffered by the alleged conspiracy, thus a complete cause of action had not been established. The conspiracy was alleged to have been undertaken by certain respondents to deprive Helena and Peter Talacko of the value of a chose in action arising from a judgment in their favour. This conspiracy involved agreements by which valuable properties in the Czech Republic were transferred to impede the recovery by Helena and Peter of an anticipated judgment debt, through what was termed a "Donation Agreement".

The High Court was required to determine whether loss or damage had been proven to the extent that the unlawful means conspiracy was actionable. A further issue was whether damages for the unlawful means conspiracy should be discounted to reflect a 20% prospect of separate recovery through proceedings commenced in the Czech Republic to set aside the Donation Agreement. The Court also considered whether a submission regarding the ongoing nature of the Czech proceedings and the potential for legal expenses to be borne by the respondents should have been permitted on appeal.

The Court ultimately revoked the grant of special leave to appeal on one ground, finding that a submission regarding the ongoing Czech proceedings had not been properly raised in the courts below and might have been met with expert evidence. The appeal was dismissed, but the cross-appeals were allowed. The Court varied previous orders of the Supreme Court of Victoria, increasing the awarded sums for damages. The appellant was ordered to pay the costs of the appeal and cross-appeals, while the fourth respondent was ordered to pay the appellants' costs of the application for leave to appeal and the appeal.