Leerdam & Anor v Noori & Ors [2009] NSWCA 90

Leerdam & Anor v Noori & Ors [2009] NSWCA 90

The claims against the appellants for misfeasance in public office and collateral abuse of process were summarily dismissed as the applicants did not exercise any relevant public power or hold a public office for purposes of the tort, and the claims for collateral abuse of process failed as the tort can only be committed by a party to proceedings and no collateral purpose was adequately pleaded.

Parties
First Appellant: Leonard Keith Leerdam; Second Appellant: Sparke Helmore Lawyers; First Respondent: Naqib Ahmed Noori; Second Respondent: The Hon Philip Maxwell Ruddock MP; Third Respondent: Commonwealth of Australia
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
01 May 2009
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal, Leave Granted, Appeal Allowed
Outcome
Appeal allowed. Proceedings against appellants summarily dismissed.
Legal Topics
Misfeasance in Public Office, Collateral Abuse of Process, Advocate's Immunity From Suit, Summary Dismissal, Strike Out, Procedural Fairness, Vicarious Liability
Torts Administrative Law Civil Procedure Misfeasance in Public Office Collateral Abuse of Process Advocate's Immunity From Suit Summary Dismissal Strike Out +2 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 3 Authorities cited 56 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Leonard Keith Leerdam

First Appellant

Sparke Helmore Lawyers

Second Appellant

Naqib Ahmed Noori

First Respondent

The Hon Philip Maxwell Ruddock MP

Second Respondent

Commonwealth of Australia

Third Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal, Leave Granted, Appeal Allowed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a solicitor acting for a Minister in AAT proceedings occupies a 'public office' for purposes of the tort of misfeasance in public office
  2. 2 Whether the tort of collateral abuse of process can be committed by a non-party (such as a legal representative)
  3. 3 Whether advocate's immunity from suit applies to intentional torts such as misfeasance in public office or collateral abuse of process

Ratio Decidendi

The claims against the appellants for misfeasance in public office and collateral abuse of process were summarily dismissed as the applicants did not exercise any relevant public power or hold a public office for purposes of the tort, and the claims for collateral abuse of process failed as the tort can only be committed by a party to proceedings and no collateral purpose was adequately pleaded.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed. Proceedings against appellants summarily dismissed.

Orders

  • Leave to appeal granted.
  • Appellants to file amended notice of appeal within seven days.