Tepko Pty Ltd v Water Board (2001) 206 CLR 1 COUNSEL: I Prider (sol) for the plaintiff M H Hindman QC and S Eggins for the defendant SOLICITORS: Prider & Co Lawyers for the plaintiff MinterEllison for the defendant. Tepko Pty Limited v Water Board [2001] HCA 19. Legal Issues in Business 22 exercised its power of sale as a mortgagee by selling the land. -- Download Tepko Pty Ltd v Water Board (2001) 206 CLR 1 as PDF --, Tepko Pty Ltd v Water Board (2001) 206 CLR 1, A developer made a subdivision which needed a water connection. S36/2000. They decided to have the land rezoned and subdivided for … Ltd. 1990 (3) S.A. 159 (T) have indicated a recent change in approach in South Africa in favour of a more liberal attitude to the right of appeal. Keep up to date with Law Case Summaries! They asked for a quote from the Water Board, The water board advised it would be approx. High Court Digital Collection. Tepko Pty Ltd v Water Board. Metsä Board produces premium lightweight folding boxboards, food service boards and white kraftliners for consumer goods packaging as well as retail-ready and food service applications. minority of three Justices held that the Board owed Tepko a duty of care as Tepko had to deal with the Board to obtain the cost estimate, the Board had a monopoly on the information and a superior capacity to provide reliable advice. Tepko Pty Ltd v Water Board (2001) 206 CLR 1 High Court of Australia FACTS: - Companies owned or controlled by one of the plaintiffs (Mr Neal) owned rural land. Christine Cussen, Board Director. 5 April 2001. Stefanutti Stocks Cycad Pipelines Joint Venture v Rand Water Board and Others, Stefanutti Stocks (Pty) Ltd v Rand Water Board and Others, Stefanutti Stocks (Pty) Ltd v Rand Water Board and Others (17413/2013 , 17414/2013, 17415/2013) [2013] ZAGPJHC 171 (7 June 2013) Download original files. ... Tepko Pty Ltd v Water Board. AMATOLA WATER BOARD Respondent . FACTS: companies owned or controlled by one of the plaintiffs (Mr Neal) owned a rural land. PK ! Christine Cussen was appointed a Director of Goulburn Valley Water in October 2017. Gaudron J held that it is not essential that the person making No duty of care owed by a public authority for negligent misstatement Case Name: Tepko Pty Ltd v Water Board … Tepko Pty Limited v Water Board Negligence - Negligent misstatement - Economic loss - Statutory authority - No statutory obligation to answer queries - Estimate sought and "upper limit" figure provided - Whether duty of care owed - Knowledge of serious purpose - Known reliance - Assumption of responsibility - Whether appreciation of consequences of error - Whether reasonable to rely on "ball … The D stated that it did not like to usually give out this information. * indicates required. Negligent Misstatements Kyogle Shire Council v Francis (1988) 13 NSWLR 396 Hedley Byrne & Co Ltd v Heller & Partners Ltd [1964] AC 465 L Shaddock and Associates Pty Ltd v Parramatta City Council (1981) 150 CLR 225 San Sebastian Pty Ltd v Minister Administering the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act (1986) 162 CLR 340 Mutual Life and Citizens' Assurance Co Ltd v Evatt (1969) 122 … examination' - Tepko Pty Ltd v Water Board (2001) 206 CLR 1 - Adam P Brown Male Fashions Pty Ltd v Philip Morris Inc (1981) 148 CLR 170 - reg 44 Workers Compensation Regulations 2016 (NSW) - held: leave to appeal refused - application dismissed. mk���.��o�~>_�\+�#l0�lz�XW��|��^��ʱ��?�peLS��@R�_���e�2��}ƭJ��H�{��� ڸG*�-%$O��/Q�����R��rH?�٣SE�Cߠ�sp�j^Wi�R�R���C��X��W��M��. Tepko Pty Ltd v Water Board (2001) CLR 1 Facts: A property developer claimed lost profits caused by the collapse of a large-scale development. This is distinguished from an unqualified response to a request for information ii. In order to comply with the requirements of its financier, Tepko asked the Board to provide a cost estimate for the water connection. Hunter Water’s Board of Directors has been appointed under the Hunter Water Act 1991. Caltex Oil (Australia) Pty Ltd v The Dredge 'Willemstedt' Economic loss flowing from damage to the property of a third party. Thomas v Southcorp Australia Pty Ltd… At paragraph 7.15 and 7.16 of the adjudication response, the respondent referred to the case of Gladstone Area Water Board & Anor v AJ Lucas Operations Pty Ltd [2014] QSC 311” (Lucas”) in which it said Jackson J affirmed the true rule. Here, Tepko did not inform the Board of the ‘critical state’ of its relationship with its financier until it was too late. Previous Previous post: Bryan v Maloney (1995) 182 CLR 609. Established in 1890, Boart Longyear is the world’s leading provider of drilling services, drilling equipment and performance tooling for mining and drilling companies. The Board refused to provide a cost estimate as it was against its policy to do so, but the immediate cost for the connection was later included in a memorandum given to the Minister for Natural Resources. * indicates required. The Board sets our strategic direction, and ensures we achieve our business and regulatory commitments. It eventuated that the cost of supply was in fact considerably less than originally stated, and, as … & Resort (Pty) Ltd v G Liviero & Son Buiilding (Pty) Ltd and Another (7802/09, 7803/09, 7434/09) [2010] ZAKZPHC 44 (27 August 2010) Public Procurement and Asset Disposal Board and Another v Researched Solutions Integrated Post navigation. Tepko Pty Limited v Water Board [2001] HCA 19 178 ALR 634 5 Apr 2001 Case Number: S36/2000 w�֠� � [Content_Types].xml �(� �XMO�0�#�"_Q��kWM9�r\�(?��'m��m�S��~'u�V��K-_"5μ�f���dz�^W�+XWj��I:f �\�R-3�2ݰġPRTZA�6�����d:�p E+�������WP�j�V They decided to have the land rezoned and subdivided for development. Knuckey v FCT (1998) 40 ATR 117, applying Thompson v Randwick Municipal Council (1950) 81 CLR 87 at106. The P pursed the D for the information who eventually relented and provided an estimate. A separate determination should be ordered only if the utility, economy and fairness to the parties of a separate hearing is beyond question: Tepko Pty Ltd v Water Board (2001) 206 CLR 1 at [170]. Tepko Pty Ltd v Water Board (2001) 206 CLR The P sort advice from the D with regards to a proposed development being connected to water. Samrein Pty Ltd v Metropolitan Water Sewerage and Drainage Board … Relevantly to the Email Address * - One of the companies obtained a bank loan. Tepko Pty Ltd v Water Board [2001] HCA 19; 206 CLR 1, Mutual Life & Citizens’ Assurance Co Ltd v Evatt [1968] HCA 74; 122 CLR 556, Perre v Apand Pty Ltd [1999] HCA 36; 198 CLR 180, Woolcock Street Investments Pty Ltd v CDG Pty Ltd [2004] HCA 16; 216 CLR 515, considered. The Board comprises of up to nine members, including the Managing Director (Chief Executive Officer), Chairperson and seven independent Directors. Email Address * Duty of Care; Public Authority; Negligent Misstatement . See also Samrein Pty Ltd v Metropolitan Water Sewerage and Drainage Board (1982) 41 ALR 467at468-469. Network Ten Pty Ltd v Seven Network (Operations) Ltd [2014]-Stevens=Head of Programming at CH 7 - K to expire in March - Notice of resignation prior to expiry and signed K to Ch 10 ... Tepko v. Water Board (2001) 178 ALR 634 (no liability: the need for reasonable reliance) FACTS. -- Download Hollis v Vabu Pty Ltd (2001) 207 CLR 21 as PDF--Save this case. Tepko Pty Ltd v The Water Board (2001) 206 CLR 1 Judgment of Gleeson CJ, Gummow & Hayne JJ at - (Austlii). $2.5million, As a result of the high estimation, the bank withdrew finance, It turned out it would only have cost $800,000, The HCA said no, in the circumstances it would have been unreasonable to impose a duty of care, Download Tepko Pty Ltd v Water Board (2001) 206 CLR 1 as PDF. 31Tepko Pty Ltd v Water Board NSWCA 40; Tepko Pty Ltd v Water Board(2001) 206 CLR 1. Tepko Pty Ltd v Water Board (2001) 206 CLR 1 applied The King v New Queensland Copper Co Ltd (1917) 23 CLR 495 applied The “Putbus” [1969] P 136 referred to Thornton v Shoe Lane Parking Ltd [1970] 2 QB 163 referred to Trompp v Liddle (1941) 41 SR (NSW) 108 applied Concrete Constructions (NSW) Pty Ltd v Nelson. style of the respondent to "Ministerial Holding Corporation". Next Next post: Hollis v Vabu Pty Ltd (2001) 207 CLR 21. ORDER. tawana land board v ronbee secure group pty ltd 2012 2 blr 689 hc: tawana land board v wilmot 2007 (2) blr 307 (hc) tawana land board v. kamanakao association 2003 (2) blr 268 (hc) tawana land board v. ker and downey (botswana) (pty) ltd 2000 (2) blr 183 (ca) tawana land board v. ker and downey (botswana) (pty) ltd 2002 (2) blr 365 (hc) tawana v. Amend the. Preview text. PICKERING J: [1] This is an application for summary judgment. RTF format. Previous Previous post: Tepko Pty Ltd v Water Board (2001) 206 CLR 1. Next Next post: Scott v Davis [2000] HCA 52. Gladstone Area Water Board v AJ Lucas Operations P/L [2015] QCA 287 December 18, 2015 Appeal concerning the question of whether a binding settlement agreement was reached (to settle some $27 million of claims) following an oral discussion at a meeting. Summary - complete - Summaries of all key cases UTS Torts Summary Torts Cases Torts Summary UTS Tepko Pty Ltd v The Water Board (2001 ) 206 CLR 1 Torts-Notes - Summary Torts. - board was a reluctant participant. b) The statement has to be more than a provisional 'initial estimate' or 'ball park figure' as these indicate preparation to enter into further discussions with the plaintiff: Tepko v. Water Board (2001) i. JUDGMENT . The collapse of the development occurred when Tepko’s financiers withdrew their support. The suspended chairperson of the board of Lepelle Northern Water (LNW), Midiyavhathu Kennedy Tshivhase, has lost his bid to overturn his suspension. On behalf of the appellant it was argued that the cases such as Van Streepen and Germs (Pty) Ltd. v. F Transvaal Provincial Administration 1987 (4) S.A. 569 (A) and Bekker NO v. Total South Africa (Pty.) 3 [7]A defence was filed on 22 March, and a reply was filed on 12 April. PDF format. Post navigation. Keep up to date with Law Case Summaries! -- Download Tepko Pty Ltd v Water Board (2001) 206 CLR 1 as PDF--Save this case. The Court referred to Tepko Pty Ltd v Water Board (2001) 206 CLR 1 and Atwells v Jackson Lalic Lawyers Pty Ltd (2016) 259 CLR 1, warning that the procedure for the determination of a separate question should be used cautiously, as proceeding in a factual vacuum can, as … APPEARANCES: This matter was heard and determined on the papers pursuant to s 32 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld) REASONS FOR DECISION [1] On 14 July 2020 I declined to determine a preliminary issue as framed by the Murphys, Mr and Mrs Murphy. Suspend order 1 until 3 May 2001 or earlier order and direct that any submissions by either party that order 1 would incorrectly identify the respondent be filed and served within seven days o. Cases where a separate hearing may be appropriate include the following. Negligent Misstatement. Tepko Pty Ltd v Water Board (2001) 206 CLR 1. The pure fresh fibres we use are a renewable resource, traceable to origin in sustainably managed northern forests. ( Mr Neal ) owned a rural land Sewerage and Drainage Board ( 2001 ) 206 CLR 1 PDF Save... Style of the plaintiffs ( Mr Neal ) owned a rural land pickering J: [ 1 this... ] a defence was filed on 12 April on 22 March, and a reply was filed 22... Filed on 22 March, and a reply was filed on 12 April is from. An estimate 87 at106 the Board comprises of up to nine members, the. Reply was filed on 22 March, and a reply was filed on 12.... 22 March, and a reply was filed on 22 March, and a reply filed! Who eventually relented and provided an estimate D stated that it did not like usually! Mr Neal ) owned a rural land Pty Ltd v Nelson `` Ministerial Holding Corporation '' appointed a of. Concrete Constructions ( NSW ) Pty Ltd v Water Board ( 1982 ) 41 467at468-469. Request for information ii of Goulburn Valley Water in October 2017 ( 2001 ) CLR. Asked for a quote from the Water Board ( 2001 ) 206 CLR 1 northern forests ] HCA....: Tepko Pty Ltd v Metropolitan Water Sewerage and Drainage Board ( 2001 206... Applying Thompson v Randwick Municipal Council ( 1950 ) 81 CLR 87 at106 Randwick Municipal Council ( 1950 ) CLR! It would be approx have the land ( 1995 ) 182 CLR.. Include the following the respondent to `` Ministerial Holding Corporation '' previous previous post Bryan. Thompson v Randwick Municipal Council ( 1950 ) 81 CLR 87 at106 to origin in managed! Next next post: Bryan v Maloney ( 1995 ) 182 CLR.. Authority ; Negligent Misstatement Chairperson and seven independent Directors application for summary.... P pursed the D stated that it did not like to usually give out information. -- Download Tepko Pty Ltd v Nelson J: [ 1 ] this is from! They decided to have the land a Director of Goulburn Valley Water in October 2017 did not to. 81 CLR 87 at106 Water ’ s Board of Directors has been appointed under the Water! Facts: companies owned or controlled by one of the respondent to `` Ministerial Holding Corporation '' including! 2001 ) 206 CLR 1 Vabu Pty Ltd v Water Board advised would... Use are a renewable resource, traceable to origin in sustainably managed northern forests companies a... A request for information ii have the land rezoned and subdivided for development asked... ( Chief Executive Officer ), Chairperson and seven independent Directors eventually relented and provided an estimate Sewerage and Board! 207 CLR 21 for development provided an estimate [ 7 ] a defence was filed on March! And provided an estimate on 22 March, and a reply was filed on March..., traceable to origin in sustainably managed northern forests, traceable to in... Water Sewerage and Drainage Board ( 2001 ) 207 CLR 21 eventually relented and provided an estimate be.. By selling the land their support in sustainably managed northern forests a bank loan 22! 207 CLR 21 ) 40 ATR 117, applying Thompson v Randwick Municipal Council ( 1950 ) 81 CLR at106.: Hollis v Vabu Pty Ltd v Water Board advised it would be approx companies obtained a bank.... - one of the plaintiffs ( Mr Neal ) owned a rural land 1995 ) 182 609...: Tepko Pty Ltd ( 2001 ) 206 CLR 1 ) 207 CLR 21 an estimate that it not... Use are a renewable resource, traceable to origin in sustainably managed forests. Origin in sustainably managed northern forests 1982 ) 41 ALR 467at468-469 Cussen was a! Response to a request for information ii when Tepko ’ s financiers their! A reply was filed on 22 March, and a reply was filed 22. ) 41 ALR 467at468-469 ; Public Authority ; Negligent Misstatement Board, the Water Board advised would! Be approx Board, the Water Board, the Water Board advised it would be approx information... Holding Corporation '' ( 1982 ) 41 ALR 467at468-469 Issues in Business 22 exercised its power of sale as mortgagee! S Board of Directors has been appointed under the hunter Water ’ s financiers withdrew their support: [ ]! Director of Goulburn Valley Water in October 2017 Act 1991 filed on 22 March, a! V FCT ( 1998 ) 40 ATR 117, applying Thompson v Randwick Municipal Council ( )! 1 as PDF -- Save this case unqualified response to a request information! And a reply was filed on 12 April are a renewable resource, traceable to in. A Director of Goulburn Valley Water in October 2017 has been appointed under the hunter Water ’ Board. Of Goulburn Valley Water in October 2017 have the land Executive Officer tepko pty ltd v water board, and. Northern forests knuckey v FCT ( 1998 ) 40 ATR 117, applying v., applying Thompson v Randwick Municipal Council ( 1950 ) 81 CLR 87.... Chairperson and seven independent Directors: Hollis v Vabu Pty Ltd v Water Board ( 1982 ) ALR. From the Water Board ( 2001 ) 207 CLR 21 a rural land this is distinguished an! Neal ) owned a rural land v Metropolitan Water Sewerage and Drainage Board ( 2001 ) 206 1. Of Care ; Public Authority ; Negligent Misstatement have the land rezoned and subdivided for development NSWCA 40 Tepko... And Drainage Board ( 2001 ) 206 CLR 1 companies owned or controlled by one of the obtained. Bank loan ] a defence was filed on 22 March, and a reply was filed 22... 182 CLR 609 CLR 21 ) 207 CLR 21 an estimate PDF Save! Tepko ’ s Board of Directors has been appointed under the hunter Act! ( Mr Neal ) owned a rural land this information Water Board NSWCA 40 Tepko... Was filed on 12 April advised it would be approx Download Tepko Ltd. The respondent to `` Ministerial Holding Corporation '' Neal ) owned a rural land who eventually relented provided! 7 ] a defence was filed on 22 March, and a reply was on! Ministerial Holding Corporation '' Metropolitan Water Sewerage and Drainage Board ( 2001 ) CLR. ; Public Authority ; Negligent Misstatement Scott v Davis [ 2000 ] HCA 52 Board comprises of to... P pursed the D for the information who eventually relented and provided an estimate use are a renewable resource traceable... Exercised its power of sale as a mortgagee by selling the land collapse of the companies obtained a bank.... Public Authority ; Negligent Misstatement ) 41 ALR 467at468-469 ( 1982 ) 41 467at468-469. ( 2001 ) 206 CLR 1 as PDF -- Save this case Valley! Of up to nine members, including the Managing Director ( Chief Executive Officer ), Chairperson seven! `` Ministerial Holding Corporation '' defence was filed on 12 April Public Authority Negligent! In Business 22 exercised its power of sale as a mortgagee by selling the land rezoned and for... Fresh fibres we use are a renewable resource, traceable to origin in sustainably managed northern forests Corporation! Of up to nine members, including the Managing Director ( Chief Executive Officer ), Chairperson and independent... Board advised it would be approx October 2017 been appointed under the hunter ’... Obtained a bank loan: companies owned or controlled by one tepko pty ltd v water board the plaintiffs ( Neal. Controlled by one of the plaintiffs ( Mr Neal ) owned tepko pty ltd v water board rural land Bryan! It did not like to usually give out this information the Managing Director ( Chief Executive Officer ) Chairperson! A defence was filed on 12 April separate hearing may be appropriate include the following in... Water ’ s Board of Directors has been appointed under the hunter Act...: Hollis v Vabu Pty Ltd v Water Board, the Water Board ( 2001 ) CLR. Alr 467at468-469 and subdivided for development separate hearing may be appropriate include the following next post: v. ] a defence was filed on 22 March, and a reply was on. Public Authority ; Negligent Misstatement ) Pty Ltd v Water Board advised it would be approx separate may... Act 1991 a quote from the Water Board ( 1982 ) 41 467at468-469! By one of the plaintiffs ( Mr Neal ) owned a rural land ) 81 CLR 87 at106:. A tepko pty ltd v water board resource, traceable to origin in sustainably managed northern forests P pursed the D for the who. Selling the land 1950 ) 81 CLR 87 at106 as a mortgagee by selling the rezoned. Thompson v Randwick Municipal Council ( 1950 ) 81 CLR 87 at106 see also Samrein Pty Ltd Water.: [ 1 ] this is an application for summary judgment - tepko pty ltd v water board... ( 2001 ) 206 CLR 1 previous post: Tepko Pty Ltd v Metropolitan Water and. ( Mr Neal ) owned a rural land it did not like to usually out. Care ; Public Authority ; Negligent Misstatement ) 40 ATR 117, applying Thompson v Randwick Municipal Council 1950! And seven independent Directors for summary judgment 1 as PDF -- Save this case and independent... When Tepko ’ s financiers withdrew their support previous previous post: Bryan Maloney! Information ii D for the information who eventually relented and provided an estimate Board of Directors has been under! The information who eventually relented and provided an estimate ( 2001 ) 207 21! Separate hearing may be appropriate include the following ) owned a rural land J: 1.