Gartner v Ernst & Young (No 2) [2003] FCA 1436

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Gartner v Ernst & Young (No 2) [2003] FCA 1436 EQUITY – fiduciary relationship – consideration of circumstances in which fiduciary relationship may exist between professional advisers and client EQUITY – unconscionable conduct – consideration of circumstances in which conduct of professional advisers in relation to client may be unconscionable PRACTICE & PROCEDURE – amendment of statement of claim – leave sought to include allegations of breach of fiduciary duty and unconscionable conduct – allegations made against professional advisers of applicants in respect of entering into financing arrangement – consideration of circumstances in which professional advisers may owe fiduciary duties to client – whether professional advisers may owe fiduciary duties to client – whether arguable case made out by allegations – consideration of nature of relationship which may give rise to unconscionable conduct on part of professional advisers

Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth)

Gartner v Ernst & Young [2003] FCA 152 referred to Ernst & Young (Reg) v Tynski Pty Ltd [2003] FCAFC 233 referred to The State of Queensland v J L Holdings Pty Ltd (1997) 189 CLR 146 cited Banque Commerciale SA En Liquidation v Akhil Holdings Ltd (1990) 169 CLR 279 applied General Steel Industries Inc v Commissioner for Railways (NSW) (1964) 112 CLR 125 cited Murex Diagnostics Australia Pty Ltd v Chiron Corporation (1995) 55 FCR 194 referred to Pancontinental Mining Ltd v Posgold Investments Pty Ltd (1994) 121 ALR 405 referred to Jenyns v Public Curator (Q) (1953) 90 CLR 113 referred to Hospital Products Limited v United States Surgical Corporation (1984) 156 CLR 41 applied Pilmer v Duke Group Limited (In Liquidation) (2001) 207 CLR 165 applied Breen v Williams (1996) 186 CLR 71 referred to Commonwealth Bank of Australia v Smith (1991) 102 ALR 453 cited United States Surgical Corporation v Hospital Products International Pty Ltd [1983] 2 NSWLR 157 referred to Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v C G Berbatis Holdings Pty Ltd [2003] HCA 18; (2003) 197 ALR 153 applied Blomley v Ryan (1956) 99 CLR 362 referred to The Commercial Bank of Australia Ltd v Amadio (1983) 151 CLR 447 cited Bridgewater v Leahy (1998) 194 CLR 457 cited Barnes v Addy (1874) LR 9 Ch App 244 referred to Consul Development Pty Ltd v DPC Estates Pty Ltd (1975) 132 CLR 373 cited Selangor United Rubber Estates Ltd v Cradock (No.3) [1968] 2 All ER 1073 cited Rowlandson v National Westminster Bank Ltd [1978] 1 WLR 798 cited Delvaux v Sociéte Générale pour Favoriser le Développment du Commerce et de l'Industrie en France SA (1992) 4 All ER 161 referred to Royal Brunei Airlines Sdn Bhd v Tan [1995] 2 AC 378 applied MICHAEL JOHN GARTNER, ALICE WINIFRED GARTNER, TYNSKI PTY LIMITED (ACN 008 162 123), NORSBAY PTY LIMITED (ACN 008 205 687), FRESREND PTY LIMITED (ACN 008 174 990), GARTNER FARMS PTY LIMITED (ACN 086 128 880) (SUBJECT TO A DEED OF COMPANY ARRANGEMENT), AUSVINE VITICULTURAL MANAGEMENT PTY LIMITED (ACN 007 184 901) (SUBJECT TO A DEED OF COMPANY ARRANGEMENT), GARTNERS' VINICULTURE MANAGEMENT PTY LIMITED (ACN 080 534 989), SKYBAY PTY LIMITED (ACN 008 163 782); VAMTOWN PTY LIMITED (ACN 008 061 407) & M J GARTNER PTY LIMITED (ACN 077 644 181) v ERNST & YOUNG, ERNST & YOUNG CORPORATE FINANCE PTY LIMITED (ACN 003 599 844) & NATIONAL AUSTRALIA BANK LIMITED (ACN 004 044 937) S 189 of 2002 MANSFIELD J 8 DECEMBER 2003 ADELAIDE