Cameron, D.J. v. Westpac Banking Corporation [1994] FCA 867

JUDGMENT No. so Socal seednzan

IN_THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA QUEENSLAND DISTRICT REGISTRY Nos. QG45 and QG123 of GENERAL DIVISION 1994

BETWEEN: DONALD JAMES CAMERON

Ad Applicant

AND: WESTPAC BANKING CORPORATION

Respondent

CORAM: WILCOX, SPENDER & BURCHETT JJ PLACE: BRISBANE DATE : 7 NOVEMBER 1994

RECEIVFD 21 NOV 1994

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

PRINCIPAL REGISTRY

WILCOX J: There is before the Court a notice of appeal that calls into question two decisions by single Judges of the Court in relation to separate proceedings. In each case, the

Judge ordered that the proceeding be struck out.

The first matter was dealt with by Drummond J in a judgment given on 28 June 1994. 'The statement of claim then before his Honour was explained in the course of discussion as being designed to allege against the respondent, Westpac Banking Corporation, that two officers of the bank had given false evidence in a criminal proceeding. His Honour discussed the matter with Mr Cameron, the applicant and now appellant, who appeared in person. He indicated to him that, even on the assumption that the officers had indeed given false evidence

(and, in fairness, I should interpolate that there is no

2. evidence of this and, indeed, the contrary view was expressed in the Court of Criminal Appeal); but, even on that assumption, the case was covered by two decisions of the High Court of Australia: namely, Cabassi_ v. Vila (1940) 64 CLR 130 and Giannarelli v. Wraith (1988) 165 CLR 543. His Honour, in the course of a short judgment, quoted from what Dawson J had to say in Giannarelli: in essence, a witness may not be sued even in respect of false testimony knowingly given. Those decisions are, of course, binding on us. As Mr Cameron conceded in argument this morning, they are an insuperable obstacle for him. Drummond J was plainly correct in the