Reitano v Jones [2001] NSWSC 1076

Reitano v Jones [2001] NSWSC 1076

A cross-claim in conspiracy must allege that the predominant purpose of the conspiracy was to injure the cross-claimant personally, and damage must be to the cross-claimant's person, property, or personal business interests, not merely as trustee; the cross-claim failed as it only alleged damage to the bankrupt estate.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 November 2001
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From Master in Equity Division, Ruling on Motion to Dismiss Part of Cross Claim
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
['conspiracy' 'bankruptcy' 'civil Procedure']
['torts' 'equity'] ['conspiracy' 'bankruptcy' 'civil Procedure']

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 / Judgment on Appeal From Master in Equity Division, Ruling on Motion to Dismiss Part of Cross Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether a conspiracy claim can succeed where the alleged injury is to property held by a trustee in bankruptcy, not the trustee personally' 'Whether an overt act in conspiracy can be a negative as well as a positive act']

Ratio Decidendi

A cross-claim in conspiracy must allege that the predominant purpose of the conspiracy was to injure the cross-claimant personally, and damage must be to the cross-claimant's person, property, or personal business interests, not merely as trustee; the cross-claim failed as it only alleged damage to the bankrupt estate.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • ['Order of Master McLaughlin set aside' 'Part of cross-claim alleging conspiracy struck out' 'Appeal allowed with costs' 'Matter listed for further directions']