Grade One Monitoring Pty Ltd trading as Artemis Security Solutions v Sargent Security (Aus) Pty Ltd [2010] NSWSC 1377

Grade One Monitoring Pty Ltd trading as Artemis Security Solutions v Sargent Security (Aus) Pty Ltd [2010] NSWSC 1377

The appeal failed because there was no evidence that Sargent failed to perform the proved contractual obligations, namely to patrol both entrances at night between 5:30pm and 7:00am and make sure they were secure. There was also no evidence showing how or when the heaters were removed, no basis to imply a term that Sargent guaranteed against theft or damage, and no evidence of negligence. Although there was slight evidence of quantum, it did not matter because breach of contract was not established.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 December 2010
Procedural Posture
Appeal From Local Court / Summons Seeking Leave to Appeal Alleging Errors of Law in Local Court Decision
Outcome
Summons dismissed; Plaintiff to pay Defendant's costs.
Legal Topics
['implied Terms' 'breach of Contract' 'security Services Contract' 'evidence of Loss and Damage' 'appeal From Local Court']
['contract Law' 'appeals'] ['implied Terms' 'breach of Contract' 'security Services Contract' 'evidence of Loss and Damage' 'appeal From Local Court']

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 Local Court / Summons Seeking Leave to Appeal Alleging Errors of Law in Local Court Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Magistrate erred in finding there was no evidence of breach of contract between Grade One Monitoring Pty Ltd and Sargent Security (Aus) Pty Ltd.' 'Whether a term should be implied that Sargent Security (Aus) Pty Ltd was required to protect the premises from theft and/or damage during the course of the patrol.' 'Whether the Magistrate erred in finding there was no evidence capable of establishing loss suffered as a result of breach.']

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal failed because there was no evidence that Sargent failed to perform the proved contractual obligations, namely to patrol both entrances at night between 5:30pm and 7:00am and make sure they were secure. There was also no evidence showing how or when the heaters were removed, no basis to imply a term that Sargent guaranteed against theft or damage, and no evidence of negligence. Although there was slight evidence of quantum, it did not matter because breach of contract was not established.

Court Disposition

Summons dismissed; Plaintiff to pay Defendant's costs.

Orders

  • ['The Summons is dismissed.' "The Plaintiff is to pay the Defendant's costs."]