Christie v Purves & 2 Ors [2007] NSWCA 182

Reported Decision: (2007) Aust Torts Reports 81-899

New South Wales Court of Appeal

CITATION: Christie v Purves & 2 Ors [2007] NSWCA 182

HEARING DATE(S): 17/07/07, 20/07/07 JUDGMENT OF: Beazley JA at 65 & 67; Ipp JA at 1; Campbell JA at 66

EX TEMPORE JUDGMENT DATE: 20 July 2007

DECISION: Appeal dismissed with costs.

CATCHWORDS: LIMITATION OF ACTIONS – period of limitation – action in tort for pure economic loss – (i) loss of an entitlement to a stream of income – (ii) loss of a potential entitlement to income tax reduction – (iii) infringement of an interest in keeping one's professional affairs and business records in proper form – appellant alleged that the first respondent (a) gave him negligent taxation advice - and (b) engaged in misleading or deceptive conduct, as a result of which the appellant suffered damage – whether the appellant's actions in negligence and misleading or deceptive conduct were statute barred by s 14 of the Limitation Act 1969 (NSW) and s 68 of the Fair Trading Act 1987 (NSW) – general principles relating to limitation of actions in negligence and misleading or deceptive conduct for pure economic loss – time commences when the cause of action accrues – cause of action accrues when the plaintiff first suffers any actual, measurable damage (although, time may run before the damage is discovered, or could, on reasonable inquiry, have been discovered, by the party allegedly wronged) – cause of action accrues even if some of the plaintiff's damages are prospective – as regards the appellant's claim for loss of income, loss was suffered immediately upon his appointment as a judge of the District Court of New South Wales on 8 September 1993 – as regards the appellant's claim arising from his failure to obtain reductions in the income tax payable to him during each of the financial years 1991, 1992 and 1993, loss was suffered at the end of each of those years – as regards the appellant's claim based on the confusion and disorder in his taxation records, loss was suffered when an independent review of those records was required by another accountant. D