Harvey v Phillips [1956] HCA 27

auaiind Foll Cor a Dist RD Cons ns Dist & Wemer& Co Gebov Insbury Pty Painov Weiner Co deat Beran —_— fare' eta" en (Bite (eis fae "a nia CRS as Lad (ig 3, (1990) $5 AER 538 jeoulegh x = FOR 465 2 aT fominees Commonwealth Gases "Be |. resize 95 C.LR.J Hor OF AUSTRALIA. $780) Hance! fy oss 199, Refi to SKA} 34 fle Cam AM v Noosa

Noose (1996 53 LGE 29,

[HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA.]

EMILY JOAN HARVEY . 5 5 ; _ APPELLANT ;

PLAINTIFF, AND

CORALIE NGARITA PHILLIPS AND 'ANOTHER cE tl : RESPONDENTS. DEFENDANTS,

ON APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF - NEW SOUTH WALES.

Practice—Action—Compromise—Counsel's authority—Authority exceeded—Limita- H. C. or A.

tion of authority unknown to other party. 1956.

The plaintiff brought an action for damages against the defendants as Sypney, executors of a surgeon in respect of injuries which she attributed to an opera- yy, 93 ; tion. Before the trial offers to settle were made by the defendants but were 4 pril 10; rejected by the plaintiff, against the advice of her counsel. When the case = came on for trial discussions of settlement were held after the jury had been MELBourNE, sworn, but the plaintiff remained adamant even after the judge had seen her June 8. in his chambers and had advised her to heed counsel's opinion. Senior pjxon C.J., counsel for the plaintiff then went from the court and it appeared that the Morlernan, plaintiff was left with the impression that he had thrown up her case. UIti- Pane ey, mately, after extreme pressure from her friends and legal advisers, the plaintiff intimated that she would accept the offer. Senior counsel on each side signed terms of settlement and the judge adjourned the Court. It appeared that the plaintiff who was deaf did not hear these final proceedings. The plaintiff then said she had never given her consent to settle and applied by motion to the Full Court to set aside. the judgment. Judgment had not in fact been signed or entered. The Full Court dismissed the motion. On ' appeal,