Indeterminate accountability can be wrongly called, otherwise perceived as associated with, the brand new floodgates dispute

Indeterminate accountability can be wrongly called, otherwise perceived as associated with, the brand new floodgates dispute

(151) The brand new Southern Wales Legislation Reform Fee, Sum ranging from People Liable for an equivalent Damage, Statement No 89 (1999) [dos.3].

The limitation into indeterminate accountability provides, while we will see, an entirely different purpose; specifically, making sure the newest obligations was discoverable ahead of time: discover Johnson Ceramic tiles Pty Ltd v Esso Australian continent Pty Ltd Aust Torts Reports [paragraph] 81-692, 63 676 (Gillard J)

(152) It’s always of good advantage to an effective plaintiff in order to sue a so-called ‘common laws defendant’ as opposed to a beneficial offender whoever liability is limited by statute.

That it dispute is therefore geared towards defending new effective management off justice

(153) Civil-law (Wrongs) Work 2002 (ACT) s 18; Laws Change (Various Conditions) Operate 1946 (NSW) s 5; Laws Change (Various Arrangements) Work 1956 (NT) ss a dozen-13; Rules Change Work 1995 (Qld) ss six-7; Laws Change (Contributory Neglect and you will Apportionment from Liability) Work 2001 (SA) ss six-7; Wrongs Operate 1954 (Tas) s step three; Wrongs Operate 1958 (Vic) ss 23B, 24; Rules Reform (Contributory Neglect and you will Tortfeasors ‘Contribution) Act 1947 (WA) s seven.

(154) Caltex Oil (Australia) Pty Ltd v The Dredge ‘Willemstad’ (1976) 136 CLR 529, 555 (Gibbs J), 593 (Mason J); San Sebastian Pty Ltd v Minister Administering the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (1986) 162 CLR 340, 353-4 (Gibbs CJ, Mason, Wilson and Dawson JJ); Bryan v Maloney (1995) 182 CLR 609, 618-19 (Mason CJ, Deane and Gaudron JJ); Esanda Finance Corporation Ltd v Peat Marwick Hungerfords (1997) 188 CLR 241, 272 (McHugh J), 302 (Gummow J); Perre v Apand Pty Ltd (1999) 198 CLR 180, 195 (Gleeson CJ), 199-200 (Gaudron J), 219-23, 233-5 (McHugh J), 289 (Kirby J), 303-5 (Hayne J), 324, 326 (Callinan J); Agar v Hyde (2000) 201 CLR 552, 563-4 (Gleeson CJ); Sullivan v Moody (2001) 207 CLR 562, 582 (Gleeson CJ, Gaudron, McHugh, Hayne and Callinan JJ); Woolcock Street Investments Pty Ltd v CDG Pty Ltd (2004) 205 ALR 522, 528-9 (Gleeson C J, Gummow, Hayne and Heydon JJ), 534-5, 543 (McHugh J), 562, 565, 566 (Kirby J). The validity of the floodgates argument has generally been treated with great scepticism: see Australian Conservation Foundation IncvCommonwealth (1980) 146 CLR 493, 557-8 (Murphy J); Boland v Yates Property Corporation Pry Ltd (1999) 167 ALR 575, 614 (Kirby J); Bowen v Paramount Builders (Hamilton) Ltd 1 NZLR 394, 422 (Cooke J); Van Soest v Residual Health Management Unit 1 NZLR 179, 202-4 (Thomas J); Spartan Steel Alloys Ltd v Martin Co (Contractors) Ltd QB 27, 38 (Lord Denning MR); McLoughlin v O’Brian 1 AC 410, 425 (Lord Edmund-Davies), 441-2 (Lord Bridge); Tame v New South Wales (2002) 211 CLR 317, 399-400 (Hayne J); Hancock v Nominal Defendant 1 Qd R 578, 603 (Davies JA). The floodgates argument is sometimes employed by the courts to deny relief where a ‘flood’ of litigants is apprehended if relief were granted: see, eg, Grand Rapids eros escort Chester v Council of the Municipality of Waverley (1939) 62 CLR 1, 7-8 (Latham CJ), 11 (Rich J); Van Soest v Residual Health Management Unit 1 NZLR 179, 198-9 (Gault, Henry, Keith and Blanchard JJ); Page v Smith 1 AC 155, 197 (Lord Lloyd); White v Chief Constable of the South Yorkshire Police 2 AC 455, 493-4 (Lord Steyn), 503 (Lord Hoffmann); Law Commission for England and Wales, Liability for Psychiatric Illness, Report No 249 (1998) [6.6] fn 9 < It plays on the fear that if the net of liability is cast too widely, the courts will be overwhelmed by a proliferation of claims and become congested, thereby diminishing their ability to dispense justice.

Leave a comment

Tu dirección de correo electrónico no será publicada. Los campos obligatorios están marcados con *