Wardman v Hatfield [2003] NSWCA 283

Wardman v Hatfield [2003] NSWCA 283

The opponent's liability under the guarantee became an actual liability no later than Perwood's default in payment of rent and outgoings, identified by the letters of demand in 1989 and/or 1991. No condition precedent in the lease required demand, proceedings, or judgment before that liability arose. The later District Court judgment concerned confirmation and quantification, not accrual of the cause of action. Because the opponent commenced proceedings against the claimants in November 2002, about 11 years after the cause of action was complete, the proceedings were statute barred.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
08 October 2003
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal and Appeal From Dismissal of Notice of Motion Seeking Dismissal of Proceedings as Statute Barred / Court of Appeal
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted; appeal allowed; District Court orders set aside; District Court proceedings dismissed.
Legal Topics
['guarantee' 'accrual of Cause of Action' 'statute Barred Proceedings' 'economic Loss' 'misleading or Deceptive Conduct']
['contract' 'limitation of Actions' 'professional Negligence' 'consumer Law'] ['guarantee' 'accrual of Cause of Action' 'statute Barred Proceedings' 'economic Loss' 'misleading or Deceptive Conduct']

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

Application for Leave to Appeal and Appeal From Dismissal of Notice of Motion Seeking Dismissal of Proceedings as Statute Barred / Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether leave to appeal should be granted from the District Court's dismissal of the claimants' notice of motion." "Whether the opponent's proceedings against the claimants were statute barred because his cause of action accrued before judgment was entered in the landlord proceedings." "When the opponent's liability as guarantor became an actual liability rather than a contingent or potential liability." "Whether the opponent's claim was properly characterised as loss of a chance or chance of a loss."]

Ratio Decidendi

The opponent's liability under the guarantee became an actual liability no later than Perwood's default in payment of rent and outgoings, identified by the letters of demand in 1989 and/or 1991. No condition precedent in the lease required demand, proceedings, or judgment before that liability arose. The later District Court judgment concerned confirmation and quantification, not accrual of the cause of action. Because the opponent commenced proceedings against the claimants in November 2002, about 11 years after the cause of action was complete, the proceedings were statute barred.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted; appeal allowed; District Court orders set aside; District Court proceedings dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal granted on condition that the claimants file their notice of appeal within 14 days of the date of these orders.' 'Appeal allowed.' 'The orders made by Acting District Court Judge Boyd-Boland on 30 April 2003 be set aside.' 'Proceedings No. 8492 of 2002 in the District Court be dismissed.' "The...