Murray v Munro [1906] HCA 25

Murray v Munro [1906] HCA 25

The Supreme Court’s decision relied only on a question of fact, namely an inference from the defendant’s conduct that he waived objection. On such a basis, special leave to appeal should not be granted, and is rescinded.

Parties
Defendant: Murray; Plaintiff: Munro
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
04 May 1906
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Application to Rescind Special Leave to Appeal
Outcome
Special leave to appeal rescinded; appellant to pay costs.
Legal Topics
Reference to Arbitration, Estoppel by Conduct, Procedure Following Arbitrator's Award, Waiver of Objection
Civil Procedure Arbitration Reference to Arbitration Estoppel by Conduct Procedure Following Arbitrator's Award Waiver of Objection

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 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Murray

Defendant

Munro

Plaintiff

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Application to Rescind Special Leave to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether special leave to appeal should be rescinded on the ground that only a question of fact is involved
  2. 2 Whether the defendant was estopped by conduct from objecting to the Judge's direction to the arbitrator
  3. 3 Proper procedure for challenging a Judge’s order of reference to arbitration

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court’s decision relied only on a question of fact, namely an inference from the defendant’s conduct that he waived objection. On such a basis, special leave to appeal should not be granted, and is rescinded.

Court Disposition

Special leave to appeal rescinded; appellant to pay costs.

Orders

  • Special leave to appeal rescinded.
  • Appellant to pay the costs of the appeal.