FAI General Insurance Company Limited v Brookman & Anor [2000] NSWSC 56

FAI General Insurance Company Limited v Brookman & Anor [2000] NSWSC 56

The Tribunal had evidence before it capable of supporting its factual finding that Gary Cohen personally was the contractor, including the contract attestation and the insurance certificate handed to Ms Brookman before execution. The facts found and supporting evidence were not incapable of justifying that finding. The matter therefore involved a question of fact, not a question of law, and the appeal failed.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 February 2000
Procedural Posture
Appeal From the Fair Trading Tribunal / Judgment
Outcome
Judgment for the defendants plus costs.
Legal Topics
['appeals Limited to Questions of Law' 'home Building Insurance' 'identification of Contracting Parties' 'findings of Fact by Tribunal']
['administrative Law' 'insurance Law' 'building and Construction Law'] ['appeals Limited to Questions of Law' 'home Building Insurance' 'identification of Contracting Parties' 'findings of Fact by Tribunal']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Appeal From the Fair Trading Tribunal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the Tribunal's finding that Gary Cohen personally, rather than Action United Pty Ltd, was the contractor was a question of law or a question of fact." 'Whether the Tribunal erred in law in its approach to ascertaining the parties to the building contract.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal had evidence before it capable of supporting its factual finding that Gary Cohen personally was the contractor, including the contract attestation and the insurance certificate handed to Ms Brookman before execution. The facts found and supporting evidence were not incapable of justifying that finding. The matter therefore involved a question of fact, not a question of law, and the appeal failed.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the defendants plus costs.

Orders

  • ['Judgment for the defendants plus costs.']