Murphy v Overton Investments Pty Ltd
| Jurisdiction | Australia Federal only |
| Judge | Gleeson CJ,McHugh,Gummow,Kirby,Hayne,Callinan,Heydon JJ |
| Judgment Date | 05 February 2004 |
| Neutral Citation | [2004] HCA 3,2004-0205 HCA A |
| Court | High Court |
| Docket Number | S78/2003 |
| Date | 05 February 2004 |
-
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
View this document and try vLex for 7 days - TRY VLEX
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Start Your 7-day Trial
121 cases
- Mcgrath; Re Pan Pharmaceuticals Ltd (in Liquidation) v Australian Naturalcare Products Pty Ltd
- Apir Systems Ltd v Donald Financial Enterprises Pty Ltd
-
Commonwealth of Australia v Davis Samuel Pty Ltd
...509 Morgan Equipment Co v Rodgers (No 2) (1993) 32 NSWLR 467 Murdocca v Murdocca [2002] NSWSC 505 Murphy v Overton Investments Pty Ltd (2004) 204 ALR 26 Nestle v National Westminster Bank plc [1994] 1 All ER 118 Nocton v Lord Ashburton [1914] AC 932 O'Halloran v R T Thomas & Family Pty L......
- Expectation Pty Ltd v Prd Realty Pty Ltd
Request a trial to view additional results
1 firm's commentaries
-
Interpreting Loss or Damage Under the Trade Practices Act
...beginning with an attempt to draw an analogy with any particular claim under the general law. In Murphy v Overton Investments Pty Limited [2004] HCA 3 (5 February 2004) the High Court of Australia overturned the Federal Court's decision in respect of how "loss or damage" should be interpret......
4 books & journal articles
-
CONSUMER PROTECTION, STATUTE AND
...Meaning of Legislation: Context, Purpose and Respect for Fundamental Rights”(2009) 20 PLR 26. 40Murphy v Overton Investments Pty Ltd(2004) 216 CLR 388 at 407, [44]. See also Marks v GIO Australia Holdings Ltd(1998) 196 CLR 494 at 503–504, [17], per Gaudron J, 510, [38], per McHugh, Hayne an......
-
The role of damages in regulating horizontal price-fixing: comparing the situation in the United States, Europe and Australia.
...obligation to mitigate its losses, although it is not clear how this operates in practice: see Murphy v Overton Investments Pty Ltd (2004) 216 CLR 388, 413-15 (Gleeson CJ, McHugh, Gummow, Kirby, Hayne, Callinan and Heydon JJ). See also Hubbards Pty Ltd v Simpson Ltd (1982) 41 ALR 509, a cas......
-
Tort Law
...suit against lawyers); Glenbrook Capital LP v Hamilton [2014] EWHC 2297 (Comm) at [42]–[44]; and Murphy v Overton Investments Pty Ltd [2004] HCA 3 at [74]. 26 [2018] SGDC 188. 27 See, eg, Given v C V Holland (Holdings) Pty Ltd (1977) 15 ALR 439 (FCA); Hollis v PH and D Stephens Investments ......
-
It's Time for Federal Regulation of Retirement Villages
...to misleading or deceptive conduct with reference to financial services. 56 Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth), sch 2 cl 18. 57 (2004) 216 CLR 388; earlier proceedings in Murphy and 112 Ors v Overton Investments Pty Limited [1998] NSWSC 425 noted by Betty Weule, ‘Retirement Village Tor......