Arthur Andersen & Co (A Firm) v GPA Group PLC & Ors [1998] FCA 1493

Arthur Andersen & Co (A Firm) v GPA Group PLC & Ors [1998] FCA 1493

Leave to appeal was refused because Arthur Andersen did not establish the prima facie case required by O 8 r 2(2). Even if there was material capable of showing GPA's involvement in a breach of s 205 of the Corporations Law, Arthur Andersen failed to show that GPA was liable in respect of the same damage claimed against Arthur Andersen. GPA's alleged conduct was, at most, the occasion or opportunity for Southern Cross to trade or for the later $1.6M misappropriation, not a legal cause of the whole of the trading losses or any identified part of them. The proposed lesser-loss contribution claim was speculative and unsupported by pleaded or evidentiary foundations.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
13 November 1998
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal From Interlocutory Orders Setting Aside Service of a Cross Claim Outside Australia / Leave to Appeal
Outcome
Leave to appeal in both cases refused with costs.
Legal Topics
['service Outside Australia' 'cross Claim for Contribution or Indemnity' 'prima Facie Case Under Federal Court Rules O 8 R 2' 'wrongs Act Contribution' 'causation' 'corporations Law S 205']
['civil Procedure' 'corporations' 'torts'] ['service Outside Australia' 'cross Claim for Contribution or Indemnity' 'prima Facie Case Under Federal Court Rules O 8 R 2' 'wrongs Act Contribution' 'causation' 'corporations Law S 205']

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 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Appeal From Interlocutory Orders Setting Aside Service of a Cross Claim Outside Australia / Leave to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether Arthur Andersen should have leave to appeal interlocutory orders revoking leave to serve its cross-claim on GPA in Ireland and removing GPA as parties to the proceedings.' 'Whether Arthur Andersen established a prima facie case under O 8 r 2(2) of the Federal Court Rules for contribution or indemnity under s 23B of the Wrongs Act 1958 (Vic).' "Whether GPA's alleged breach of s 205 of the Corporations Law was a legal cause of Southern Cross' trading losses or of the alleged $1.6M loss, rather than merely an occasion or opportunity for those losses."]

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to appeal was refused because Arthur Andersen did not establish the prima facie case required by O 8 r 2(2). Even if there was material capable of showing GPA's involvement in a breach of s 205 of the Corporations Law, Arthur Andersen failed to show that GPA was liable in respect of the same damage claimed against Arthur Andersen. GPA's alleged conduct was, at most, the occasion or opportunity for Southern Cross to trade or for the later $1.6M misappropriation, not a legal cause of the whole of the trading losses or any identified part of them. The proposed lesser-loss contribution claim was speculative and unsupported by pleaded or evidentiary foundations.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal in both cases refused with costs.

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal in each case is refused with costs.']