Hannpost Pty Ltd (trading as Copyworld) v Mita Copiers Australia Pty Ltd & Anor [1996] FCA 520

Hannpost Pty Ltd (trading as Copyworld) v Mita Copiers Australia Pty Ltd & Anor [1996] FCA 520

Copyworld was not permitted to claim reliance damages on appeal as it had pleaded and conducted its case for expectation damages at trial; the cross-appeal as to liability was not competent under Federal Court Rules as it was not confined to 'a part of the judgment'; however, for special reasons, the requirements for a notice of appeal were dispensed with and the cross-appeal was treated as an appeal in accordance with the rules. The assessment of damages and the costs order by the trial judge were within discretion and should not be disturbed.

Parties
Appellant/cross Respondent/respondent: Hannpost Pty Ltd trading as Copyworld; Respondent/cross Appellant/applicant: Mita Copiers Australia Pty Ltd; Respondent: Reginald Morrison Gray
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
21 June 1996
Procedural Posture
Appeal and Cross Appeal / Federal Court of Australia Full Court Judgment on Appeal From a Single Judge
Outcome
Both the appeal and cross-appeal dismissed. Each party to bear its own costs, except as to preparation of appeal and cross-appeal papers and the notice of motion costs.
Legal Topics
Breach of Contract, Assessment of Damages, Extension of Time to Appeal, Cross Appeals, Award of Costs
Contract Law Civil Procedure Damages Costs Breach of Contract Assessment of Damages Extension of Time to Appeal Cross Appeals +1 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 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Hannpost Pty Ltd trading as Copyworld

Appellant/cross Respondent/respondent

Mita Copiers Australia Pty Ltd

Respondent/cross Appellant/applicant

Reginald Morrison Gray

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal and Cross Appeal / Federal Court of Australia Full Court Judgment on Appeal From a Single Judge

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in the assessment of damages for breach of contract
  2. 2 Whether the trial judge made an error in failing to consider reliance damages in addition to expectation damages
  3. 3 Whether the cross-appeal was competent under the Federal Court Rules

Ratio Decidendi

Copyworld was not permitted to claim reliance damages on appeal as it had pleaded and conducted its case for expectation damages at trial; the cross-appeal as to liability was not competent under Federal Court Rules as it was not confined to 'a part of the judgment'; however, for special reasons, the requirements for a notice of appeal were dispensed with and the cross-appeal was treated as an appeal in accordance with the rules. The assessment of damages and the costs order by the trial judge were within discretion and should not be disturbed.

Court Disposition

Both the appeal and cross-appeal dismissed. Each party to bear its own costs, except as to preparation of appeal and cross-appeal papers and the notice of motion costs.

Orders

  • The requirements of O52 Federal Court Rules for Mita Copiers Australia Pty Ltd to file and serve a notice of appeal are dispensed with, and the notice of cross-appeal is to be treated as a notice of appeal under O52 r15.
  • The appeal by Hannpost Pty Ltd is dismissed.