Gore v Montague Mining Pty Ltd [2000] FCA 1214

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Gore v Montague Mining Pty Ltd [2000] FCA 1214 NEGLIGENCE – CAUSATION – documentation of arrangements between mining tenement holders and mining entrepreneur – mining entrepreneur retained solicitor – solicitor failed to recommend insertion of assignment clause – other subsequent negligent advice – client did not give evidence whether such advice, if given, would have been accepted – other evidence that advice might not have been accepted – whether primary judge erred in finding that the solicitor's negligence caused any loss. Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth), s 52

Hall v Foong (1995) 65 SASR 281 followed Sellars v Adelaide Petroleum NL (1994) 179 CLR 297 followed Chappel v Hart (1998) 195 CLR 232 followed Bennett v Minister of Community Welfare (1992) 176 CLR 408 referred to WCW Pty Ltd v Bolster & Co (unreported, 6 January 1993) cited Sykes v Midland Bank Executor and Trustee Co Ltd [1971] 1 QB 113 followed Lillicrap v Nalder & Son [1993] 1 All ER 724 referred to Hanflex Pty Ltd v N S Hope & Associates [1990] 2 Qd R 218 (Full Court) followed PETER L GORE & ORS v MONTAGUE MINING PTY LTD N 1494 OF 1999 HILL, CARR & SUNDBERG JJ 30 AUGUST 2000 PERTH (Heard in Sydney)

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY N 1494 OF 1999

On appeal from a Judge of the Federal Court of Australia

BETWEEN: PETER L GORE & ORS TRADING AS CLAYTON UTZ

Appellants

AND: MONTAGUE MINING PTY LIMITED

(ACN 074 592 902)

Respondent

JUDGES: HILL, CARR & SUNDBERG JJ

DATE OF ORDER: 30 AUGUST 2000

WHERE MADE: PERTH (Heard in Sydney)

THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. The appeal be allowed. 2. The cross-appeal be dismissed. 3. The judgment given on 22 December 1999 be set aside and in lieu thereof judgment be entered in favour of the respondent against the appellants in the sum of twenty dollars ($20.00) being nominal damages. 4. The appellants pay the respondent's costs at first instance of the negligence issue incurred up to and including 20 August 1998 and the respondent pay the appellants' costs of that issue thereafter. 5. The respondent pay the appellants' costs at first instance in respect of the issue of damages. 6. The respondent pay the appellants' costs of the appeal and the cross-appeal. Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.