GARUDA INDONESIAN AIRWAYS v BACKER SPIELVOGEL BATES LTD [1997] NSWCA 119

GARUDA INDONESIAN AIRWAYS v BACKER SPIELVOGEL BATES LTD

SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES COURT OF APPEAL

POWELL, BEAZLEY and STEIN JJA 7 October 1997, 4 December 1997 [1997] NSWCA 119

Contract — oral agreement, whether services within scope of agreement. Ostensible authority of manager

Representatives of the appellant airline and the respondent advertising agency reached an oral agreement in Bangkok for the delivery of and payment for advertising services. The respondent's agent in Australia performed advertising services for the appellant and sued for payment. The trial judge gave a verdict for the respondent for its fees plus interest.

On appeal:

The appellant argued that the advertising services rendered in Australia by the respondent's agent were not within the scope of the contract and that its Australian manager did not have authority to authorise the services performed under the contract.

Held:

The appellant's Australian manager had ostensible authority and the services performed were within the scope of the contract. The trial judge's findings of fact based on his preference for the credibility of the respondent's evidence over the appellant's should not be disturbed.

The respondent is entitled to interest on the verdict because the appellant has had the use of the money.

Powell JA I agree with Stein JA. Beazley JA I agree with Stein JA.

Stein JA This is an appeal from a judgment of Patten DCJ allowing recovery for work done by the respondent advertising agency for work performed by its agent for the appellant pursuant to an oral agreement. His Honour awarded the respondent the sum of $98,647.24, plus interest of $121, 943.28.

The respondent is a member of a group of companies which carry on business as an advertising agency in Australia and Asia, while the appellant is an Indonesian company, registered as a foreign company in NSW.