Till v Nominal Defendant

[1999] QCA 490

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION: 

Till v The Nominal Defendant
Mulcair v Puckering & Ors
[1999] QCA 490

PARTIES: 

PETER TILL
(Plaintiff/Respondent)
v
THE NOMINAL DEFENDANT
(Defendant/Appellant)

FILE NO/S: 

Appeal No 2676 of 1999
SC No 73 of 1997

ORIGINATING

COURT: 

Supreme Court at Mackay

PARTIES: 

DENISE DOROTHY MULCAIR
(Plaintiff/Appellant)
v
DAVID JOHN PUCKERING
(First Defendant/Respondent)
RONALD FREDERICK OLIVER
(Second Defendant/Respondent)
VACC INSURANCE CO LIMITED ACN 004 167 953
(Third Defendant/Respondent)

FILE NO/S: 

Appeal No 2558 of 1999
DC No 34 of 1998

ORIGINATING
COURT: 

District Court at Gladstone

DIVISION: 

Court of Appeal

PROCEEDING: 

General civil appeals

DELIVERED ON: 

26 November 1999

DELIVERED AT: 

Brisbane

HEARING DATE: 

22 October 1999

JUDGES: 

Davies and Pincus JJA and Jones J

ORDER: 

In Appeal No 2676 of 1999:

1.	appeal allowed;
2.	orders made below set aside;
3.	order that the respondent pay the appellant's costs here and below;
4.	order that the respondent be granted an indemnity certificate pursuant to s 15 of the Appeal Costs Fund Act 1973.

In Appeal No 2558 of 1999: appeal dismissed with costs.

CATCHWORDS: 

STATUTES – ACTS OF PARLIAMENT – INTERPRETATION – REFERENCE TO FRAMEWORK OF STATUTE – RULES OF CONSTRUCTION – GENERALLY – Interpretation of s 41(6) Motor Accident Insurance Act 1994 – whether the denial of an admission of liability is precluded – context of the Act – statutory consequences of an admission of liability – whether s 41(6) merely restates the general law

Motor Accident Insurance Act 1994, s 41(6)

ESTOPPEL – GENERAL PRINCIPLES – Whether detriment suffered as a consequence of any act or omission in reliance on the admissions – whether unconscionable for the insurers to deny liability

Morris v FAI General Insurance Company Ltd [1996] 1 QdR

495, followed

The Commonwealth v Verwayen (1990) 170 CLR 394,

followed

INSURANCE – THIRD PARTY LIABILITY INSURANCE – MOTOR VEHICLES – RIGHTS AND LIABILITIES OF INSURER IN RESPECT OF DEFENCE AND COMPROMISE – QUEENSLAND – Whether insurer permitted to deny liability once admitted – whether precluded by the Motor Accident Insurance Act 1994 or general law principles

Motor Accident Insurance Act 1994, s 41(6)

In Appeal No 2676 of 1999:

COUNSEL:	Mr R J Douglas SC, with him Mr K N Wilson, for appellant Mr J A Griffin QC, with him Mr J D Costello, for respondent
SOLICITORS:	Walsh Halligan Douglas for appellant Sciacca's Lawyers & Consultants, town agents for Barry, Beaverson & Stenson of Mackay, for respondent In Appeal No 2558 of 1999:
COUNSEL:	Mr D V C McMeekin SC for appellant Mr R J Douglas SC, with him Mr K N Wilson, for respondents
SOLICITORS:	Quinlan Millar & Treston, town agents for V A J Byrne & Co of Gladstone, for appellant McInnes Wilson, town agents for McInnes Wilson of Maroochydore, for respondents

1. THE COURT: These are two appeals involving the same questions. Those questions arise in the following way. In each case an insurer[1] made an admission of liability under s 41(1)(b) of the Motor Accident Insurance Act 1994…