Locke v H.C. Loneragan & Company Pty Ltd as trustee for the Loneragan Family Trust t/as Quantum Forensic Solutions

[2025] NSWCA 166

NSW Court of Appeal

View on CaseLaw

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Evidence
3. › Cross-examination
4. › Rule in Browne v Dunn
5. › Whether inferences drawn by primary judge contradicted witness's evidence
6. › Whether rule extends to any construction of conduct legally adverse to a party's case
7. › Consequences of breach
8. › Discretion of trial judge
1. Restitution
2. › Quantum meruit
3. › Fair and reasonable remuneration
4. › Evidence sufficient to establish fair and reasonable rates and hours
5. › Whether failure to dispute invoices constitutes admission by conduct
6. › Whether direct evidence of market rates required

Quick Take

The rule in Browne v Dunn does not require a cross-examiner to put to a witness every construction of the witness's conduct that would be legally adverse to the case of the party who called the witness; the rule is engaged only where the witness has given evidence that is to be contradicted. A party's failure to dispute detailed invoices, combined with continued engagement of services and partial payment, constitutes an admission by conduct sufficient to establish fair and reasonable remuneration in quantum meruit.