Emanuele, Guiseppe v Hedley, Anthony Robert & Ors [1998] FCA 709

Emanuele, Guiseppe v Hedley, Anthony Robert & Ors [1998] FCA 709

Both actions are hopeless because, on the appellant's case, the loss suffered resulted from his own rational and voluntary criminal act, by which he offered a bribe; as a matter of law, courts will not lend aid where the claim is based on an illegal act. None of the pleaded torts—intentional infliction of economic harm, negligence, misfeasance in public office, abuse of process, or malicious prosecution—can succeed. Summary judgment was therefore correctly entered for the respondents.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
19 June 1998
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From Summary Judgment Order
Outcome
Appeals dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['intentional Infliction of Harm' 'negligence' 'misfeasance in Public Office' 'abuse of Process' 'malicious Prosecution' 'summary Judgment' 'vicarious Liability']
['tort Law' 'public Law'] ['intentional Infliction of Harm' 'negligence' 'misfeasance in Public Office' 'abuse of Process' 'malicious Prosecution' 'summary Judgment' 'vicarious Liability']

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 / Judgment on Appeal From Summary Judgment Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether respondents were liable for damages arising from the appellant's voluntary criminal act of offering a bribe" 'Whether intentional infliction of economic harm, misfeasance in public office, negligence, abuse of process, and malicious prosecution were established on the facts pleaded' 'Whether summary judgment was correct in dismissing all causes of action']

Ratio Decidendi

Both actions are hopeless because, on the appellant's case, the loss suffered resulted from his own rational and voluntary criminal act, by which he offered a bribe; as a matter of law, courts will not lend aid where the claim is based on an illegal act. None of the pleaded torts—intentional infliction of economic harm, negligence, misfeasance in public office, abuse of process, or malicious prosecution—can succeed. Summary judgment was therefore correctly entered for the respondents.

Court Disposition

Appeals dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ['By consent, appeals against Ronald Alwin Grey, Brian Bates, Peter John Lamb, Arthur Brown, Allan John Dau, Peter Edward Phillips, Ian Douglas Temby, Mark Samuel Weinberg and Michael Rozenes dismissed.' 'Appeals against Anthony Robert Hedley and the Commonwealth of Australia dismissed.' 'Appellant to pay the costs...