NSW Caselaw
New South Wales Supreme Court
CITATION : Australasian Correctional Services Pty Ltd and GEO Group Australia Pty Ltd v El-Masri [2009] NSWSC 1239
HEARING DATE(S) : 12 November 2009
JUDGMENT DATE : 19 November 2009
JUDGMENT OF : Smart AJ
DECISION : Summons dismissed with costs.
CATCHWORDS : Whether settlement of proceedings had been agreed - Construction of correspondence including emails
LEGISLATION CITED : Evidence Act 1995
CATEGORY : Principal judgment
CASES CITED : Masters & Anor v Cameron (1954) 91 CLR 353 Tallerman and Company Pty Limited v Nathan's Merchandise (Victoria) Pty Limited (1956 – 1957) 98 CLR 93
Australasian Correctional Services Pty Ltd (First Plaintiff) PARTIES : GEO Group Australia Pty Ltd (Second Plaintiff) Ahmad Saleh El-Masri (Defendant)
FILE NUMBER(S) : SC 3224/09
COUNSEL : N Polin (Plaintiffs) I Archibald (Defendant)
SOLICITORS : Davidson Gerathy (Plaintiffs) - (Defendant)
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES EQUITY DIVISION
Smart AJ
Thursday 19 November 2009
3224/09 Australasian Correctional Services Pty Ltd (ACS) and GEO Group Australia Pty Ltd (GEO) v Ahmad Saleh El-Masri JUDGMENT 1 Ahmad Saleh El-Masri, in proceedings 20492 of 2008 (Common Law Division), sued the Commonwealth of Australia, ACS and GEO, GSL (Australia) Pty Limited and a number of individual officers of GSL (Australia) Pty Ltd. 2 He claims damages, exemplary, punitive and aggravated damages and costs. He claims that he was wrongfully detained from 14 November 2002 to 14 October 2005 at Villawood Immigration Detention Centre, that there was a breach of a duty of care in failing to provide a level of medical care reasonably designed to meet the plaintiff's health care needs, trespass (unlawful assault) and that he was further wrongfully detained at Villawood Immigration Detention Centre on 28 November 2006. 3 By their Summons filed 16 June 2009, ACS and GEO seek: "1. A declaration that proceedings numbered 20492/08 in the Supreme Court of New South Wales (Sydney Registry) between the plaintiffs herein, as second and third defendants to those proceedings, and the defendant herein, as plaintiff to those proceedings have been settled on the basis that: a. A verdict is entered in those proceedings in favour of the second and third defendants to those proceedings against the plaintiff to those proceedings. b. The plaintiff and the second and third defendants to those proceedings pay their own costs of those proceedings.
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate