Sinclair v Haynes [2000] NSWSC 642

New South Wales Supreme Court

CITATION : Sinclair v Haynes [2000] NSWSC 642 CURRENT JURISDICTION: Common Law Division FILE NUMBER(S) : SC 12793/98 HEARING DATE(S) : 5 July 2000 JUDGMENT DATE : 5 July 2000

PARTIES : Julia Ann Sinclair (Appellant) Stanley Haynes (Respondent) JUDGMENT OF : Hamilton J

LOWER COURT Local Court JURISDICTION : LOWER COURT 305/97 FILE NUMBER(S) : LOWER COURT Magistrate Crews JUDICIAL OFFICER :

COUNSEL : C F Hodgson (Appellant) S Singh-Panwar, Solicitor (Respondent) SOLICITORS : Ferrys Law Firm (Appellant) Aubrey Brown Partners (Respondent) CATCHWORDS : TORTS [227] - Trover and detinue - Remedies - Action for conversion - Damages - Value at time of conversion - Circumstances in which cost of replacement by manufacturer may be taken as value. Furness v Adrium Industries Pty Ltd (1993) Aust Tort Reports 81-245 CASES CITED : Gaba Formwork Contractors Pty Ltd v Turner Corporation Ltd (1991) 32 NSWLR 175 J & E Hall Ltd v Barclay [1937] 3 All ER 620 McGregor on Damages (16th Ed 1997) [357] DECISION : Magistrate's determination affirmed.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES COMMON LAW DIVISION

HAMILTON J

WEDNESDAY, 5 JULY 2000

12793/98 JULIA ANN SINCLAIR v STANLEY HAYNES

JUDGMENT

HIS HONOUR:

1 Before me is a stated case in an action for conversion in the Local Court. The item converted was a horse float or trailer fitted out for use by a horse dentist. The plaintiff's family had been in horse dentistry for some hundred years and reference was made in the evidence to at least two other horse dentists in Australia. There is no dispute before me that the trailer was converted by the defendant. The point brought to this Court relates solely to the assessment of damages. Those damages were assessed on 20 February 1998 by Magistrate Crews at $12,000. In her judgment her Worship said only this relating to the quantum of damages: "As to the measure of damages, on the basis of the line of authority cited by Mr Pearce, together with Mr Cupit's evidence as to the value of the trailer in November, 1995, which I accept, I have determined that it is proper to award damages in the amount [of $12,000]." 2 The questions raised by the stated case arise out of the following contentions by the appellant: "The Appellant contends that my determination was erroneous in point of law upon the grounds: