Fletcher Construction Australia Ltd v Lines MacFarlane Marshall Pty Ltd

(2001) 4 VR 28; [2001] VSCA 167

Victorian Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Judgments and orders
3. › Reasons for judgment
4. › Duty to give reasons
5. › Whether strict obligation to give reasons contemporaneously with pronouncement of judgment
6. › Whether judge of superior court must deliver reasons at time of pronouncing judgment
7. › Whether delay of five weeks in delivering reasons constitutes error of law
1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Judgments and orders
3. › Reasons for judgment
4. › Amendment of reasons after publication
5. › Whether judge may alter reasons after judgment pronounced
6. › Whether changes of substance between draft and final reasons
7. › Whether judge impermissibly moulded reasons to accord with judgment
1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Judgments and orders
3. › Functus officio
4. › Whether judge functus officio after pronouncement of judgment
5. › Whether jurisdiction to deliver reasons after judgment pronounced or perfected
1. Practice and Procedure
2. › New trial
3. › Discretion to order new trial
4. › Whether miscarriage of justice
5. › Whether delay in delivering reasons productive of material prejudice

Quick Take

A judge of a superior court may properly pronounce judgment and deliver reasons later where the interests of justice require it; there is no strict common law obligation of contemporaneity. Palmer v Clarke is confined to District Court judges in New South Wales. Even after judgment is entered, a judge may alter reasons provided the changes do not produce, in substance, different reasons and are made within a period not unduly long. The distribution of draft reasons to parties is inadvisable and should be avoided.