Morrison v Town of Victoria Park

[2007] WASCA 164

Western Australia Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Contract
2. › Formation
3. › Post-contractual conduct as evidence of formation
4. › Whether subsequent correspondence admissible on question of contract formation
5. › Whether Magistrate erred in characterising post-contractual correspondence as self-serving
1. Contract
2. › Formation
3. › Sufficiency of evidence
4. › Oath against oath case
5. › Whether open to Magistrate to prefer one witness's account over another
1. Damages
2. › Mitigation of loss
3. › Breach of contract
4. › Whether plaintiff acted unreasonably in failing to negotiate substitute contract with defendant after wrongful termination
5. › Whether defendant's subsequent correspondence constituted offer capable of mitigating loss
1. Appeal
2. › Appeal from Magistrates Court to District Court
3. › Review of findings of fact
4. › Credibility findings
5. › Whether District Court judge erred in overturning Magistrate's findings on credibility

Quick Take

Post-contractual conduct is admissible on the question of whether a contract was formed, but a trial court is entitled to place less weight on subsequent correspondence than on oral evidence, particularly where the correspondence was generated after a dispute arose and may be self-serving. A plaintiff who has been wrongfully terminated from a contract does not fail to mitigate merely by declining to negotiate a new agreement with the defendant where the defendant's correspondence does not constitute an offer, the working relationship has been damaged, and the plaintiff has reasonable unresolved concerns about the circumstances of termination.