Mitchell Morgan Nominees Pty Ltd & Anor v Vella & Ors [2011] NSWCA 390

Mitchell Morgan Nominees Pty Ltd & Anor v Vella & Ors [2011] NSWCA 390

Hunt & Hunt was not a concurrent wrongdoer with the fraudsters, as their negligence caused different economic loss—the absence of enforceable security—not the fraudulent loss of funds; thus, Hunt & Hunt's liability was not subject to proportionate limitation under Pt 4 of the Civil Liability Act 2002.

Parties
Appellant: Mitchell Morgan Nominees Pty Ltd; Respondent: Hunt & Hunt Lawyers
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
15 December 2011
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; primary judgment set aside as to Hunt & Hunt; substituted judgment in favour of Mitchell Morgan against Hunt & Hunt for amount to be agreed (with directions for further orders/agreement on amount and costs).
Legal Topics
Proportionate Liability, Negligence of Solicitors, Fraud and Forgery, Mortgage Indefeasibility, Concurrent Wrongdoers, Apportionable Claims, Causation of Loss
Tort Law Property Law Civil Procedure Proportionate Liability Negligence of Solicitors Fraud and Forgery Mortgage Indefeasibility Concurrent Wrongdoers +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 23 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mitchell Morgan Nominees Pty Ltd

Appellant

Hunt & Hunt Lawyers

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Hunt & Hunt were concurrent wrongdoers with the fraudsters under Pt 4 of the Civil Liability Act 2002 in relation to the lender's loss
  2. 2 Correct identification of the relevant economic loss—distinction between damage and damages
  3. 3 Whether the acts/omissions of the fraudsters caused the same loss as the negligent solicitors' actions

Ratio Decidendi

Hunt & Hunt was not a concurrent wrongdoer with the fraudsters, as their negligence caused different economic loss—the absence of enforceable security—not the fraudulent loss of funds; thus, Hunt & Hunt's liability was not subject to proportionate limitation under Pt 4 of the Civil Liability Act 2002.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; primary judgment set aside as to Hunt & Hunt; substituted judgment in favour of Mitchell Morgan against Hunt & Hunt for amount to be agreed (with directions for further orders/agreement on amount and costs).

Orders

  • Judgment for Mitchell Morgan against Hunt & Hunt for a sum to be agreed (damages to reflect what would have been recovered under a properly worded mortgage, including interest as described).
  • Parties to provide agreed short minutes of orders by 30 January 2012; in default, file respective short minutes and written submissions within same time.