JIWIRA PTY LTD and ANOR v FERRIER and ORS [1997] NSWCA 168

JIWIRA PTY LTD and ANOR v FERRIER and ORS

SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES COURT OF APPEAL

GLEESON CJ, MASON P and MEAGHER JA 21 August 1997, 21 August 1997

[1997] NSWCA 168

LEGAL PRACTITIONERS — SOLICITOR AND CLIENT — APPELLANTS SUED RESPONDENT SOLICITORS FOR BREACH OF CONTRACT ALLEGING CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES — Appeal against trial judge's findings of no successful challenge made out — Appeal dismissed.

LEGAL PRACTITIONERS — BREACH OF CONTRACT — APPEAL — appellants sued the respondents, their solicitors, alleging breach of contract and consequential damages — trial judge made factual findings in favour of respondents, concluding no breach of contract and, further, no damage — HELD — No successful challenge had been made to the trial judge's findings of fact.

Gleeson CJ This is an appeal against a decision of Cooper DCJ given in the District Court on 25 October 1996. The appellants were the plaintiffs in the proceedings in the District Court. The respondents, a firm of solicitors, were the defendants. Cooper DCJ found in favour of the defendants and entered judgment for the defendants, ordering the plaintiffs to pay the defendants' costs.

The unsuccessful plaintiffs have now appealed. They claim that, in the event that the appeal is successful this Court should enter judgment in favour of the appellants against the respondents in the sum of $23,728.26. It is unnecessary to distinguish between the two appellants for the purpose of stating that position.

The issues in this appeal are somewhat narrower than the issues which were litigated before Cooper DCJ. Furthermore, the facts of the case are somewhat complex and in these reasons for judgment I will not attempt to go over them in the detail in which they appear in the reasons for judgment of Cooper DCJ. Rather I will assume that his Honour's reasons for judgment are available to be read with these reasons and will confine my references to the facts of the case to those which appear to me to be of central importance to the resolution of the issue that has been litigated in this appeal. It is not to be taken from that that I regard the detail of the fact - and in particular the details set out in the judgment of Cooper DCJ, as irrelevant or unimportant.