Prus-Grzybowski, Alexander v Everingham, Paul Anthony Edward [1983] FCA 6

Prus-Grzybowski, Alexander v Everingham, Paul Anthony Edward [1983] FCA 6

The incapacity created by s.8 of the Treason and Felony Forfeiture Act 1874 (SA) must be read in light of its historical context and structure. It does not bar a person convicted of a non-capital felony from bringing all actions for damages but is confined to actions relating to property or debts that would vest in a Curator; it does not extend to an action for negligent professional advice. Thus, s.8 does not constitute a full defence to the plaintiff's claim for negligence in this case.

Parties
Appellant (plaintiff): Alexander Prus-Grzybowski; First Respondent (first Defendant): Paul Anthony Edward Everingham; Second Respondent (second Defendant): Peter George Howard; Third Respondent (third Defendant): Peter John Butler Tiffin
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
08 February 1983
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Appellate Judgment After Preliminary Legal Point
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Legal Incapacity, Effect of Conviction, Forfeiture, Meaning of 'damage', Rights of Action of Convicts
Civil Procedure Torts Statutory Interpretation Legal Incapacity Effect of Conviction Forfeiture Meaning of 'damage' Rights of Action of Convicts

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 4 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Alexander Prus-Grzybowski

Appellant (plaintiff)

Paul Anthony Edward Everingham

First Respondent (first Defendant)

Peter George Howard

Second Respondent (second Defendant)

Peter John Butler Tiffin

Third Respondent (third Defendant)

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Appellate Judgment After Preliminary Legal Point

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a person convicted of a non-capital felony is incapable, by virtue of the Treason and Felony Forfeiture Act 1874 (SA), of bringing an action for damages for negligence
  2. 2 Interpretation of 'damage' in s.8 of the Act: whether it extends to all damages or is limited to damage to property or physical person
  3. 3 Whether s.9 vests in a Curator rights of action for negligent professional advice

Ratio Decidendi

The incapacity created by s.8 of the Treason and Felony Forfeiture Act 1874 (SA) must be read in light of its historical context and structure. It does not bar a person convicted of a non-capital felony from bringing all actions for damages but is confined to actions relating to property or debts that would vest in a Curator; it does not extend to an action for negligent professional advice. Thus, s.8 does not constitute a full defence to the plaintiff's claim for negligence in this case.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • The appeal is allowed with costs.
  • The judgment of the trial judge dismissing the appellant's claim is set aside.