REDKEN LABORATORIES (AUST) PTY LIMITED v DOCKER & ANOR [2000] NSWCA 100

REDKEN LABORATORIES (AUST) PTY LIMITED v DOCKER & ANOR [2000] NSWCA 100

Redken was entitled to an indemnity from Achievement for all sums it must pay Ms Docker, as Achievement breached an implied contractual term to exercise reasonable care and skill, and its negligence was causally connected to the injury. Damages awarded to Ms Docker were not excessive—the judge adequately considered her employment termination and melanoma diagnosis, with no evidence that the melanoma would have reduced her earning capacity in the period assessed. The trial judge erred in denying the implied term and indemnity claim but not in his assessment of quantum, save for agreed-upon double counting corrections.

Parties
Appellant: Redken Laboratories (Aust) Pty Limited; First Respondent: Natasha Docker; Second Respondent: Achievement Concepts Pty Limited
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
09 June 2000
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Post Trial Appeal From Supreme Court Common Law Division
Outcome
Appeal partly allowed, partly dismissed; damages adjusted for double counting; order for indemnity to Redken from Achievement; standing over for further submissions on orders, damages quantum, and costs.
Legal Topics
Construction and Interpretation of Contracts, Implied Term of Reasonable Care, Damages for Breach of Implied Term, Co Tortfeasors, Apportionment of Liability, Indemnity, Concurrent Liability in Contract and Tort
Contracts Torts Negligence Construction and Interpretation of Contracts Implied Term of Reasonable Care Damages for Breach of Implied Term Co Tortfeasors Apportionment of Liability +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 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Redken Laboratories (Aust) Pty Limited

Appellant

Natasha Docker

First Respondent

Achievement Concepts Pty Limited

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Post Trial Appeal From Supreme Court Common Law Division

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether excessive damages were awarded for economic loss to Ms Docker
  2. 2 Whether the trial judge failed to account for Ms Docker's choice to terminate her employment for further studies and melanoma's effect on earning capacity
  3. 3 Whether an implied term of reasonable care existed in the contract between Redken and Achievement

Ratio Decidendi

Redken was entitled to an indemnity from Achievement for all sums it must pay Ms Docker, as Achievement breached an implied contractual term to exercise reasonable care and skill, and its negligence was causally connected to the injury. Damages awarded to Ms Docker were not excessive—the judge adequately considered her employment termination and melanoma diagnosis, with no evidence that the melanoma would have reduced her earning capacity in the period assessed. The trial judge erred in denying the implied term and indemnity claim but not in his assessment of quantum, save for agreed-upon double counting corrections.

Court Disposition

Appeal partly allowed, partly dismissed; damages adjusted for double counting; order for indemnity to Redken from Achievement; standing over for further submissions on orders, damages quantum, and costs.

Orders

  • Appeals stood over for mention before the Registrar on 19 June 2000 to be re-listed for argument on form of orders, amount of damages and costs, unless orders made by consent.
  • Redken's cross-claim against Achievement allowed; hidden J's order dismissing the cross-claim set aside and verdict for Redken against Achievement entered.