Roxborough v Rothmans of Pall Mall Australia Ltd
| Jurisdiction | Australia Federal only |
| Judge | Gleeson CJ,Gaudron,Hayne JJ,Gummow J,Kirby J,Callinan J |
| Judgment Date | 06 December 2001 |
| Neutral Citation | 2001-1206 HCA B,[2001] HCA 68 |
| Court | High Court |
| Docket Number | S199/2000 |
| Date | 06 December 2001 |
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeUnlock 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
180 cases
-
Info-communications Development Authority of Singapore v Singapore Telecommunications Ltd (No 2)
...in David Securities Ltd v Commonwealth Bank of Australia [1992] 66 ALJR 768. For the main submission, he relied on Roxborough v Rothmans [2001] HCA 68. 143 Mr Davinder Singh further raised another new contention. He referred to SingTel’s argument that as $1.5 billion was paid under a statut......
-
Bank of New York Mellon (International) Ltd v Cine-UK Ltd
...“gap-filling”. 83 Mr Seitler QC relied upon Carr LJ's analysis of the decision of the High Court of Australia in Roxborough v Rothmans of Pall Mall Australia Ltd [2001] HCA 68; [2001] 208 CLR 516 (“ Roxborough”). In that case retailers bought tobacco products from licensed wholesalers under......
-
Campbells Cash and Carry Pty Ltd v Fostif Pty Ltd
...of Appeal 10 as common issues of law include not only the general matter of the scope of the principle established by Roxborough v Rothmans of Pall Mall Australia Ltd11 but also the significance to the cause of action upheld in that case of certain specific legislation 12 and the relevance ......
- Asia Television Ltd v Yau's Entertainment Pty Ltd
Get Started for Free
3 firm's commentaries
-
The Dispute Resolution Review - British Virgin Islands
...11 Goff & Jones, The Law of Unjust enrichment (8th ed.). 12 Roxborough and Others v. Rothmans of Pall Mall Australia Limited (2001) 208 CLR 516. 13 BVIHC (COM) 14 BVIHC (COM) 2011/0103. 15 Black Swan Investment ISA v. Harvest View Ltd & Anor BVIHCV 2009/0039 confirming the jurisdict......
-
Recent Developments In The Law Of Unjust Enrichment - Paul Toms And Joseph Gourgey
...[72]. The appeal centred on the scope of these exceptions, including the cases of Roxborough v Rothmans of Pall Mall Australia Ltd [2001] HCA 68 and Barnes v Eastenders Cash & Carry plc [2014] UKSC 26. However, the present case was held not to fall under any of the exceptions for a simple r......
-
Recent Developments In The Law Of Unjust Enrichment - Paul Toms And Joseph Gourgey
...[72]. The appeal centred on the scope of these exceptions, including the cases of Roxborough v Rothmans of Pall Mall Australia Ltd [2001] HCA 68 and Barnes v Eastenders Cash & Carry plc [2014] UKSC 26. However, the present case was held not to fall under any of the exceptions for a simple r......
15 books & journal articles
-
A Pyrrhic Victory for Unjust Enrichment in Singapore? Esben Finance Ltd v Wong Hou‐Lianq Neil
...Unjust Enr ichment’ (1999) 115 LQR 245; Jack Beatson, ‘Restitutionand Contract: Non-Cumul?’ (2000) 1 Theoretical Inquiries in Law 1.143 [2001] HCA 68, (2001) 208 CLR 516 at [75],citing for example Grantham and Rickett, ibid.144 Esben at [247].145 For example Wilkinson vLloyd (1845) 7 QB 27 ......
-
CONSTRUCTIVE TRUSTS AND DISCRETION IN AUSTRALIA: TAKING STOCK.
...(1) Carty v London Borough of Croydon [2005] 1 WLR 2312, 2319 [25] (Dyson LJ). (2) Roxborough v Rothmans of Pall Mall Australia Ltd (2001) 208 CLR 516, 537-8 [57] (Gummow (3) See, eg, the discussion below in Parts III(B)(1) and IV(C)(3). (4) That is, those who do not have an immediate right......
-
Restatement (Third) of Restitution and Unjust Enrichment, vols.1-2.
...[1943] AC 32, 65. (26) See First Restatement, above n 12, [section] 1 comment c. (27) Roxborough v Rothmans of Pall Mall Australia Ltd (2001) 208 CLR 516, 528-9 [24], 529 [27] (Gleeson CJ, Gaudron and Hayne JJ), 548 [83], 549-50 [86], 551 [89] (Gummow J) ('Roxborough'); Ben Kremer, 'The Act......
-
Restitution
...is only concerned with the enrichment of the defendant, not the loss of the plaintiff (Roxborough v Rothmans of Pall Mall Australia Ltd(2001) 185 ALR 335). 19.40 The Court of Appeal was content to state that the defence is not available in the context of private law claims, incorporating by......
Get Started for Free