Shekhani v Ardino [2009] NSWCA 361

Shekhani v Ardino [2009] NSWCA 361

The trial judge's conclusion that the appellant's alleged work accident claim was a conscious fabrication was open on the evidence, including the contemporaneous hospital records, inconsistencies in the appellant's evidence, discrepancies between his witnesses, and credibility findings that were not shown to be...

Source-derived case information.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
09 November 2009
Procedural Posture
Appeal in a Professional Negligence Damages Claim Against a Solicitor / Appeal From the District Court of New South Wales Decision of S J Gibb DCJ Dismissing the Claim
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
['solicitor Negligence' 'alleged Failure to Advise on Common Law Rights' 'fraudulent Personal Injury Claim' 'appellate Review of Credibility Findings' 'assessment of Damages']
['torts' 'professional Negligence' 'workers Compensation' 'appeals'] ['solicitor Negligence' 'alleged Failure to Advise on Common Law Rights' 'fraudulent Personal Injury Claim' 'appellate Review of Credibility Findings' 'assessment of Damages']

Source-derived case record

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 in a Professional Negligence Damages Claim Against a Solicitor / Appeal From the District Court of New South Wales Decision of S J Gibb DCJ Dismissing the Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the trial judge erred in finding that the appellant did not sustain a work accident and that his claim was fraudulent.' 'Whether damages could be awarded for the lost chance of pursuing a common law claim where the putative claim was found to be fraudulent.' "Whether the trial judge erred in assessing damages on the basis that the appellant's injuries did not exceed the value of the workers' compensation settlement."]

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge's conclusion that the appellant's alleged work accident claim was a conscious fabrication was open on the evidence, including the contemporaneous hospital records, inconsistencies in the appellant's evidence, discrepancies between his witnesses, and credibility findings that were not shown to be erroneous. Once the putative common law claim was found to be fraudulent, the appellant's prospects of success were nil and no damages could be awarded for loss of a chance. The damages assessment also disclosed no appealable error. The appeal was therefore dismissed with costs.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs

Orders

  • ['Appeal dismissed with costs']