McCartney & Ors v Orica Investments Pty Ltd & Ors [2011] NSWCA 337

Court of Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: McCartney & Ors v Orica Investments Pty Ltd & Ors [2011] NSWCA 337 Hearing dates: 16 and 17 August 2011 Decision date: 08 November 2011 Before: Giles JA at [1], Macfarlan JA at [192], Young JA at [193] Decision: 1. Direct that no later than 18 November 2011 the parties inform the Associate to Giles JA by joint memorandum of any correction to the calculation of damages and whether the Court's orders are to include an order for the limited new trial. 2. Direct that the parties file and serve their respective submissions accompanied by draft orders - (a) if necessary, as to repayment of the judgment sum and costs; and (b) as to costs of the hearing before the primary judge and on appeal; the appellants no later than 23 November 2011 and the respondents no later than 28 November 2011. Unless the parties request an oral hearing, in which case the Court will consider but not necessarily agree to the request, or the Court considers that an oral hearing is necessary, the Court will determine these remaining matters on the written submissions. [Note: The Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 provide (Rule 36.11) that unless the Court otherwise orders, a judgment or order is taken to be entered when it is recorded in the Court's computerised court record system. Setting aside and variation of judgments or orders is dealt with by Rules 36.15, 36.16, 36.17 and 36.18. Parties should in particular note the time limit of fourteen days in Rule 36.16.] Catchwords: DAMAGES - breach causing supplier of goods to cease supply - likelihood that supplier would have ceased supply in any event - whether error in rejecting supplier's evidence - whether error in assessing likelihood - appellate review of credibility-based findings - nature of appellate review of assessment of likelihood - inferences in favour of plaintiff where defendant's wrong makes quantification difficult. Cases Cited: Abalos v Australian Postal Commission (1990) 171 CLR 167; Allen v Tobias [1958] HCA 13; 98 CLR 367; Armory v Delamirie (1722) 1 Stra 505; 93 ER 664; Backwell v AAA (1997) 1 VR 182; Beech v Advanced Management Consulting Pty Ltd [2002] NSWCA 311; Blatch v Archer (1774) 1 Cowp 63; 98 ER 969; Bourne v Fosbrooke (1865) 18 CB (NS) 515; 144 ER 545; Bosebe Pty Ltd v Bakavgas [2009] NSWCA 117; Burden v Rath (1986) Aust Torts Rep 80-050; Calder v Boyne Smelters Ltd (1991) 1 Qd R 325; Childrens v Saxby (1683) 1 Vern 207; 23 ER 417; Clunnes v Pezzey (1807) 1 Camp 8; 170 ER 857; Commonwealth v Amann Aviation Pty Ltd [1991] HCA 54; 174 CLR 64; Davis v Veigel [2011] NSWCA 170; Diamond v Simpson (No 1) [2003] NSWCA 67; (2003) Aust Torts Rep 81-695; Donald v McKeown [2004] NSWCA 285; Dwyer v Calco Timbers Pty Ltd [2008] HCA 13; (2008) 234 CLR 124; Dyer v Tymewell (1690) 2 Vern 123; 23 ER 688; East India Company v Evans (1684) 1 Vern 308; 23 ER 486; Fox v Percy [2003] HCA 22; (2003) 214 CLR 118; Fuller v Galvin [1995] NSWCA 157; Golosky v Golosky (CA, 5 October 1983, unreported; Government Insurance Office of New South Wales v Case (1976) 9 ALR 194; Gray v Haig (1855) 20 Beav 219; 52 ER 587; Hammersmith & City Railway Company v Brand (1869) LR 4 HL 171; Harper v Bangalow Motors (CA, 24 July 2990, unreported); Houghton v Immer (No 155) Pty Ltd (1997) 44 NSWLR 46; Indian Oil Corporation Ltd v Greenstone Shipping SA (Panama) [1988] QB 345; Lavender View Pty Ltd v North Sydney Council [1999] NSWSC 255; (1999) 104 LGERA 255; Lawton v Sweeney (1844) 8 Jurist 964; LJP Investments Pty Ltd v Howard Chia Investments Pty Ltd (No 2) (1989) 24 NSWLR 499; LMI Australasia Pty Ltd v Baulderstone Hornibrook Pty Ltd [2003] NSWCA 74; Lujans v Yarrabee Coal Company Pty Ltd [2008] HCA 51; (2008) 249 ALR 663; Lupton v White (1808) 15 Ves Jun 432; 33 ER 817; Macedonian Orthodox Community Church St Petka Incorporated v His Eminence Petar the Diocesan Bishop of Macedonian Orthodox Diocese of Australia and New Zealand [2008] HCA 42; (2008) 237 CLR 66; Macquarie International Health Clinic Pty Ltd v Sydney South West Area Health Service [2010] NSWCA 268; (2010) 15 BPR 28,563; Malec v J C Hutton Pty Ltd (1990) 169 CLR 638; Moran v McMahon (1985) 3 NSWLR 700; Murphy v Mark (1977) VR 316; Murphy v Overton Investments Pty Ltd [2004] HCA 3; (2004) 216 CLR 388; Norbis v Norbis (1986) 161 CLR 513; The Ophelia [1916] 2 AC 206; Roper v Johnson (1873) LR 8 CP 167; Rosebanner Pty Ltd v EnergyAustralia [2009] NSWSC 43; 223 FLR 406; Shimokawa v Lewis [2009] NSWCA 266; Singer v Berghouse (1994) 181 CLR 201; Sherwood v Guneser (1992) 110 FLR 459; State of New South Wales v Moss [2000] NSWCA 133; (2000) 54 NSWLR 536; TCN Channel 9 Pty Ltd v Hayden Enterprises Pty Ltd (1989) 16 NSWLR 130; Tyco Australia Pty Ltd v Optus Networks Pty Ltd [2004] NSWCA 333; White v Lady Lincoln (1803) 8 Ves Jun 363; 32 ER 395; Yarrabee Coal Company Pty Ltd v Lujans [2009] NSWCA 85; (2009) 53 MVR 187; Category: Principal judgment Parties: William Thomson Venables McCartney - First Appellant Ingredients Plus Pty Ltd - Second Appellant Graeme Bruce Love - Third Appellant Orica Investments Pty Ltd - First Respondent Bronson & Jacobs Pty Ltd - Second Respondent Orica Australia Pty Ltd - Third Respondent Representation: A J Sullivan QC & J Zerelli - Appellants I M Jackman SC, J Stoljar SC and J K Taylor - Respondents Hassett Dixon - Appellants Mallesons Stephen Jaques - Respondents File Number(s): CA 260399/05 Decision under appeal Citation: Orica Investments Pty Ltd & Ors v William McCartney & Ors [2007] NSWSC 645; Orica Investments v McCartney [2010] NSWSC 488 Before: White J - 25/6/07 Ball J - 28/5/10 File Number(s): SC 3895/05