The Court refused to summarily dismiss novel claims for damages for breach of statutory duty under ss 198AD and 65 of the Migration Act, holding that the same material facts underpinned non-impugned claims (declaratory relief and false imprisonment), that the novelty of the breach of statutory duty claims created unacceptable risks of appeal and bifurcation, and that summary dismissal would have only modest impact on trial length. However, the Court struck out specific paragraphs of the pleading for failing to articulate the causal link between breach and loss, for using the open-ended term 'including' which rendered allegations embarrassing, and for pleading 'unrelated outrageous conduct' (infringement of rights different from those wronged by the alleged breach) as a basis for exemplary damages. The question whether ss 198AD and 65 impose duties actionable in damages remains unresolved.
The full text is available to signed-in members.