Sheather v Staples Waste Removals Pty Limited (No 2) [2014] FCA 84

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Sheather v Staples Waste Removals Pty Limited (No 2) [2014] FCA 84 Citation: Sheather v Staples Waste Removals Pty Limited (No 2) [2014] FCA 84

Appeal from: Staples Waste Removals Pty Limited v Arev Computer Centre Pty Ltd (No 2) [2012] FMCA 214

Parties: JOHN ALICK SHEATHER v STAPLES WASTE REMOVALS PTY LIMITED and SVEN EDWIN BJORNSSON

File number: NSD 716 of 2012

Parties: SVEN EDWIN BJORNSSON v STAPLES WASTE REMOVALS PTY LIMITED and JOHN ALICK SHEATHER

File number: NSD 747 of 2012

Judge: NICHOLAS J

Date of judgment: 19 February 2014

Corrigendum: 18 March 2014

Catchwords: AGENCY – appeal against finding of a relationship of agency arising out of registration by appellant of domain name for and in name of respondent – where arrangements between appellant and respondent wholly oral – where competing accounts of relevant conversation – where credibility based findings made – whether primary judge failed to consider evidence inconsistent with witness' account of relevant conversations – whether primary judge's findings glaringly improbable or contrary to compelling inferences. ACCESSORIAL LIABILITY – appeal against finding that solicitor liable for knowingly assisting in appellant's fraudulent breach of fiduciary duty under second limb of Barnes v Addy – where appellant was solicitor's client – whether solicitor entitled to act on client's instructions – whether solicitor entitled to accept correctness of instructions – whether solicitor wilfully blind to client's fraudulent design – whether circumstances would have indicated to an honest and reasonable solicitor that client was acting in breach of fiduciary duty. EQUITABLE COMPENSATION – appeal against calculation of amount payable – where multiple respondents joined – where proceeding against one respondent settled on basis that it be discontinued and covenant not to sue given in return for settlement sum – whether allowance should be made for receipt of settlement sum in determining amount of equitable compensation payable by other respondents – whether allowance should be made for respondent's work and effort in obtaining and maintaining registration of domain name for benefit of respondent.