When do you pursue an action in the Supreme Court of Victoria (Trial Division)?
How do you balance the cost of legal fees with your choice of Barrister and instructing solicitors?
What if it has taken you several years to mount this action in the courts and it has almost cost you everything you have?
Is Justice seen to be done?
Do we have an effective legal system?
Has the blindfolded lady balanced those scales?
Stockwell v State of Victoria  VSC 497 (17 December 2001)
The memorable statement from the case in point, Stockwell.
493 ‘The fact was that, as at 1 July 1989, the plaintiff’s land was devalued by the existence of the nuisance. However, the devaluation continued each time there was a dog attack. If the relevant employees had performed their duty, the value of the land in the hands of the plaintiff would have been restored to what it should have been if the nuisance did not exist. The potential of dog attacks would ensure that the value was still less. After 1 July 1989, when the first dog attack occurred, there was a new cause of action. Damage was suffered. The fact that it had occurred meant that the value of the property was less. If the attacks were eradicated, then the value would have been restored. In my opinion, the plaintiff is entitled to recover the loss which crystallised on the sale. The loss was continuing.’
P. Hughes comments…..
I can see a similar situation in any National Park where sheep and wild dogs exist.
Wild Dogs roaming in national Parks. Park authorities trying to balance the preservation of nature and assets. Federal governments and state governments with limited budgets.
An important Indigenous site, a National Park and Sheep Stations.
wild dog_04 FINAL MAY14 TO ARWORK (1)
No comments yet.