Bruin v Larney [2006] NSWSC 636

New South Wales Supreme Court

CITATION : Bruin v Larney [2006] NSWSC 636

HEARING DATE(S) : 22 June 2006

JUDGMENT DATE : 29 June 2006

JURISDICTION : Common Law Division

JUDGMENT OF : Associate Justice Malpass at 1

DECISION : The appeal fails. The Summons is dismissed. The Plaintiff is to pay the costs of the proceedings.

CATCHWORDS : Claim for debt evidenced by IOU - appeal - no error in point of law - decision of Magistrate founded on findings of fact supported by ample evidence.

CASES CITED : Toll (FCGT) Pty Ltd v Alphapharm Pty Ltd (2004) 219 CLR 165

PARTIES : Hans Ten Bruin (Plaintiff) Brian Larney (Defendant)

FILE NUMBER(S) : SC 16054/05

COUNSEL : J S Mitchell (Plaintiff) J P Mrsic (Defendant)

SOLICITORS : Sydun & Co, Solicitors (Plaintiff) CBD Law (Defendant)

LOWER COURT JURISDICTION : Local Court

LOWER COURT FILE NUMBER(S) : 1944/05

LOWER COURT JUDICIAL OFFICER : Lulham LCM

LOWER COURT DATE OF DECISION : 25/11/04

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES COMMON LAW DIVISION

Associate Justice Malpass

Thursday, 29 June 2006

16054 of 2005 Hans Ten Bruin v Brian Larney

JUDGMENT 1 His Honour: The Defendant provided services as a contractor to a company known as Professional Printing Pty Limited (which is now in liquidation). The services included work in relation to the preparation of certain financial statements. The Plaintiff was the Managing Director and Principal of the company. 2 An external auditor provided accounting services for the company (inter alia in relation to the financial statements). Since 1991, those services were provided by Mr Mar. The financial statements were signed by the Plaintiff as a Director of the company. The material showed an indebtedness to the Defendant in the sum of $25,267.65. 3 The company ceased trading (about July 2002). Thereafter, the company went into liquidation (in about August 2003). 4 On 27 August 2003, a document which has been described as an IOU, came into being (the "IOU"). The document was signed by the Plaintiff and his signature was witnessed. It acknowledged indebtedness in the sum of $25,268 (the "sum"). The contents thereof are set forth later in this judgment.