HINGST
v
CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING (AUST) PTY LTD (ABN 62 392 781 199)
[2019] HCASL 227
M60/2019
The application for special leave to appeal does not raise any doubt as to the correctness of the decision of the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of Victoria. Special leave should be refused.
Pursuant to r 41.08.1 of the High Court Rules 2004 (Cth), we direct the Registrar to draw up, sign and seal an order dismissing the application.
V.M Bell S.J Gageler 14 August 2019
Details
- AGLC
- Hingst v Construction Engineering (Aust) Pty Ltd (ABN 62 392 781 199) [2019] HCASL 227
- Case
- [2019] HCASL 227
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The High Court considered an application for special leave to appeal in a case involving a dispute between Mr Hingst and Construction Engineering (Aust) Pty Ltd. Mr Hingst sought to appeal a decision of the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of Victoria, which had dismissed his appeal against a decision of the trial judge that dismissed his action against the company for damages for personal injury and economic loss. The injury occurred when a concrete panel fell from a formwork, causing Mr Hingst to suffer a serious back injury.
The legal issues before the High Court were whether the appeal raised a doubt as to the correctness of the decision of the Court of Appeal, and whether special leave should be granted. The Court was required to determine whether there was an arguable error of law in the Court of Appeal's decision that warranted the High Court's intervention.
The Court held that the application for special leave did not raise any doubt as to the correctness of the decision of the Court of Appeal. The Court found that the Court of Appeal had correctly applied the relevant legal principles, and had properly considered the evidence and arguments presented by both parties. The Court concluded that there was no arguable error of law in the Court of Appeal's decision, and that special leave should be refused. The Court further directed the Registrar to draw up, sign and seal an order dismissing the application.
Accordingly, the application for special leave to appeal was dismissed, and the decision of the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of Victoria was upheld.
The legal issues before the High Court were whether the appeal raised a doubt as to the correctness of the decision of the Court of Appeal, and whether special leave should be granted. The Court was required to determine whether there was an arguable error of law in the Court of Appeal's decision that warranted the High Court's intervention.
The Court held that the application for special leave did not raise any doubt as to the correctness of the decision of the Court of Appeal. The Court found that the Court of Appeal had correctly applied the relevant legal principles, and had properly considered the evidence and arguments presented by both parties. The Court concluded that there was no arguable error of law in the Court of Appeal's decision, and that special leave should be refused. The Court further directed the Registrar to draw up, sign and seal an order dismissing the application.
Accordingly, the application for special leave to appeal was dismissed, and the decision of the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of Victoria was upheld.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.