Technical Products Pty Ltd v State Government Insurance Office [1989] HCA 24

High Court of Australia Brennan, Deane, Dawson, Toohey and Gaudron JJ. Technical Products Pty Ltd v State Government Insurance Office [1989] HCA 24

ORDER Appeal dismissed with costs.

Cur. adv. vult.

The following written judgments were delivered:—

May 2 Brennan, Deane and Gaudron JJ.

The judgment of Toohey J. adequately and concisely sets out the background facts. His Honour's judgment also sets out the critical statutory provision, namely, s. 3(1) of the Motor Vehicles Insurance Act 1936 Q ("the Act"). We turn at once to a consideration of the issues raised by the appeal.

The appellant's primary submission is that the Full Court of the Supreme Court of Queensland has given undue significance to the words "in respect of such motor vehicle" in s. 3(1) of the Act. The appellant argues that those words do not represent an independent limitation of the scope of the mandatory cover required by that sub-section. If the requirement in s. 3(1) that the injury be "caused by, through, or in connection with" the particular motor vehicle is satisfied, the liability by way of damages for that injury will, so the appellant submits, be liability "in respect of" that motor vehicle for the purposes of the sub-section.

The construction of s. 3(1) for which the appellant contends derives some support from the sub-section's statutory context. Thus, the Act's title states that it is to require the owners of motor vehicles to insure against their liability to pay compensation "on Account of Injuries to Persons caused by, through, or in connection with such Motor Vehicles", without mentioning any superimposed qualification that the relevant liability also be "in respect of" the relevant vehicle. Some substantive provisions (see, e.g., ss. 4A and 4B) refer to the requirement that the relevant injury be "caused by, through, or in connection with" the relevant motor vehicle without any such further qualification.