Polar Aviation Pty Ltd v Civil Aviation Safety Authority (No 4) [2011] FCA 1126

Polar Aviation Pty Ltd v Civil Aviation Safety Authority (No 4) [2011] FCA 1126

The further amended statement of claim was struck out as it disclosed no reasonable cause of action; the pleaded duties of care were inconsistent with the statutory regime giving primacy to air navigation safety, there was no private right of action for breach of statutory duty, the pleaded tort of interference with business interests did not exist as formulated, and the particulars for misfeasance in public office were fundamentally deficient. The applicants had no reasonable prospect of successfully prosecuting the proceeding.

Parties
First Applicant: Polar Aviation Pty Ltd (ACN 007 986 834); Second Applicant: Clark Andrew Butson; First Respondent: Civil Aviation Safety Authority; Second Respondent: Terence Farquharson; Third Respondent: Garry Presneill; Fourth Respondent: Robert Collins; Fifth Respondent: Jim Marcolin; Sixth Respondent: Peter John; Seventh Respondent: Alan Cook
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
30 September 2011
Procedural Posture
Application to Strike Out Pleadings and for Summary Judgment / Judgment on Interlocutory Application
Outcome
Application allowed; statement of claim struck out; proceeding dismissed; further leave to re-plead refused; parties given opportunity to address costs.
Legal Topics
Strike Out of Pleadings, Summary Judgment, Statutory Duty of Care, Negligence of Statutory Authorities, Misfeasance in Public Office, Breach of Statutory Duty
Practice and Procedure Administrative Law Torts Strike Out of Pleadings Summary Judgment Statutory Duty of Care Negligence of Statutory Authorities Misfeasance in Public Office +1 more

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 5 Authorities cited 52 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Polar Aviation Pty Ltd (ACN 007 986 834)

First Applicant

Clark Andrew Butson

Second Applicant

Civil Aviation Safety Authority

First Respondent

Terence Farquharson

Second Respondent

Garry Presneill

Third Respondent

Robert Collins

Fourth Respondent

Jim Marcolin

Fifth Respondent

Peter John

Sixth Respondent

Alan Cook

Seventh Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application to Strike Out Pleadings and for Summary Judgment / Judgment on Interlocutory Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether pleadings disclosed no reasonable cause of action against statutory body and its officers
  2. 2 Whether statutory authority owed duty of care inconsistent with statutory duties
  3. 3 Whether action for unlawful interference with trade/business interests exists as pleaded

Ratio Decidendi

The further amended statement of claim was struck out as it disclosed no reasonable cause of action; the pleaded duties of care were inconsistent with the statutory regime giving primacy to air navigation safety, there was no private right of action for breach of statutory duty, the pleaded tort of interference with business interests did not exist as formulated, and the particulars for misfeasance in public office were fundamentally deficient. The applicants had no reasonable prospect of successfully prosecuting the proceeding.

Court Disposition

Application allowed; statement of claim struck out; proceeding dismissed; further leave to re-plead refused; parties given opportunity to address costs.

Orders

  • The further amended statement of claim dated 29 September 2010 be struck out.
  • Pursuant to s 31A(2) of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth), the application dated 12 April 2010 for (amongst other things) damages, be dismissed.