Premier Travel Pty Limited & 3 Ors v Yandell & 2 Ors [2007] NSWSC 985

Premier Travel Pty Limited & 3 Ors v Yandell & 2 Ors [2007] NSWSC 985

Leave is granted in part to file the third cross-claim against the plaintiffs on certain paragraphs as the allegations demonstrate a sufficiently arguable case, but leave against the solicitors (Cutlers) is refused as their silence does not fairly amount to an arguable misrepresentation.

Parties
First Plaintiff: Premier Travel Pty Limited; Second Plaintiff: Noviga Pty Ltd; Third Plaintiff: Betaco Pty Ltd; Fourth Plaintiff: Robcox Investments Pty Ltd; First Defendant: Robert Walter Yandell; Second Defendant: Robert Rex Wright; Third Defendant: Dean Robert Stell
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
17 August 2007
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to File Cross Claim / Interlocutory
Outcome
Leave granted in part to file a third cross-claim against plaintiffs; leave refused against solicitors (Cutler Hughes & Harris)
Legal Topics
Cross Claims, Leave to File Cross Claim, Misrepresentation by Silence, Imputation of Knowledge to Client, Satisfaction and Settlement
Civil Procedure Cross Claims Leave to File Cross Claim Misrepresentation by Silence Imputation of Knowledge to Client Satisfaction and Settlement

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Premier Travel Pty Limited

First Plaintiff

Noviga Pty Ltd

Second Plaintiff

Betaco Pty Ltd

Third Plaintiff

Robcox Investments Pty Ltd

Fourth Plaintiff

Robert Walter Yandell

First Defendant

Robert Rex Wright

Second Defendant

Dean Robert Stell

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to File Cross Claim / Interlocutory

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether leave should be granted to file a third cross-claim against the plaintiffs and their solicitors
  2. 2 Whether causes of action in the proposed cross-claim must necessarily fail
  3. 3 Whether notice to a solicitor constitutes notice to a client

Ratio Decidendi

Leave is granted in part to file the third cross-claim against the plaintiffs on certain paragraphs as the allegations demonstrate a sufficiently arguable case, but leave against the solicitors (Cutlers) is refused as their silence does not fairly amount to an arguable misrepresentation.

Court Disposition

Leave granted in part to file a third cross-claim against plaintiffs; leave refused against solicitors (Cutler Hughes & Harris)

Orders

  • Leave given to the cross defendants to the second cross claim to file a third cross claim against the plaintiffs substantially in the form of paragraphs 1 and 2, 4 to 8, 10 to 31, and 47(a) to (e) and (g) to (i) of Annexure A to the amended notice of motion filed in Court on 17 August 2007.
  • The cross defendants to the second cross claim file and serve the third cross claim on or before Friday 31 August 2007.