On Friday, the High Court published a near unanimous judgment in Commonwealth of Australia v Cornwell  HCA 16 on the accrual of a cause of action for negligence in which pure economic loss was claimed. I am yet to read the judgment properly, however it is apparent that a cause of action in negligence was found to have accrued decades after the parallel contractual cause of action, which was complete upon breach of a duty of care owed by the Commonwealth to the plaintiff in 1965. Callinan J dissented, saying the cause of action was well and truly statute barred. Neither of the decisions discussed in recent posts, in which a defendant-friendly approach was taken, Winnote v Page, or Jessup v Wetherell, are considered in the decision.
- Man gives up only after suing lawyer for negligence in suing previous lawyer retained to sue lawyer before that
- Federal Court Dishes Out Some Serious Proportionate Liability Interpretation
- AR Conolly & Company’s Benchmark digest
- Negligence claim against solicitor is a relevant factor in a limitation period extension application, part II
- Unrepresented woman ordered to pay costs of statute barred case