18 Dec 2009
AUSTRALIAN CEDAR PTY LIMITED V EASTOWN TIMBER PRODUCTS LIMITED HC WANG CIV-2008-483-23
- Citation
- openlaw-8d1158ee_d852_42b5_a6e2_95d7b365cde1.pdf
- Court
- High Court
IAG failed to discharge the onus for a defendant's summary judgment because it did not demonstrate that Eastown's causes of action cannot succeed; there is a reasonably arguable interpretation that the Worldwide extension covers the pleaded claims and that the efficacy exclusion is ambiguous or narrower than IAG contends, and negligence to inspect/warn can be viewed as collateral to the defect and thus arguable covered; accordingly summary judgment and strike out must be dismissed and the claims proceed to trial.