The Trust Company Ltd v VISA Global Logistics Pty Ltd (No 2)

Case

[2017] NSWSC 326

31 March 2017


Details
AGLC Case Decision Date
The Trust Company Ltd v VISA Global Logistics Pty Ltd (No 2) [2017] NSWSC 326 [2017] NSWSC 326 31 March 2017

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Trust Company Ltd sought to recover damages from VISA Global Logistics Pty Ltd for economic loss allegedly caused by the latter's negligence in the construction of a property. VISA Global Logistics had engaged a builder to construct the property and, in turn, The Trust Company Ltd entered into a contract to purchase the property from VISA Global Logistics. The Trust Company Ltd alleged that the builder's negligence in constructing the property resulted in economic loss to it. The court was asked to determine whether VISA Global Logistics should be given leave to amend its defence to the cross-claim to allege a duty of care owed by the builder to The Trust Company Ltd and whether The Trust Company Ltd was vulnerable to the want of care by the builder.
The court found that VISA Global Logistics should be given leave to amend its defence to the cross-claim to allege a duty of care owed by the builder to The Trust Company Ltd. The court found that the issue of vulnerability was a question of fact and could not be determined on the basis of the pleadings alone. The court found that The Trust Company Ltd had not demonstrated that it had no prospect of proving that it was vulnerable to the want of care by the builder. The court found that the issue of vulnerability was a question of fact that should be determined at trial.
The court ordered that VISA Global Logistics be given leave to amend its defence to the cross-claim to allege a duty of care owed by the builder to The Trust Company Ltd. The court ordered that the issue of vulnerability be determined at trial.
Details

Areas of Law

  • Civil Litigation & Procedure

  • Tort Law

Legal Concepts

  • Duty of Care

  • Causation

  • Vulnerability

Actions
Download as PDF Download as Word Document


Cases Citing This Decision

0