Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-hvd4g Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-30T21:20:32.044Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Corcoran v. Corcoran

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 January 2025

G. A. Rumble
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Case Notes
Information
Federal Law Review , Volume 6 , Issue 3 , September 1975 , pp. 397 - 401
Copyright
Copyright © 1975 The Australian National University

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

1

[1974] V.R. 164. Supreme Court of Victoria; Adam J.

References

2 Id. 165. In view of the High Court's decision in Anderson v. Eric Anderson Radio & T.V. Pty Ltd (1965) 114 C.L.R. 20, the defendant did not seek to argue that the defence of interspousal immunity was established by virtue of the “full faith and credit” provisions of s. 118 of the Constitution or s. 18 of the State and Territorial Laws and Records Recognition Act 1901-1964.

3 Chaplin v. Boys [1971] A.C. 356, 381 per Lord Guest. Limitation legislation is so classified: Phillips v. Eyre (1870) L.R. 6 Q.B. 1, 29-30 and John Robertson & Co. Ltd v. Ferguson Transformers Pty Ltd (1972-1973) 129 C.L.R. 65. However, Matthews J. refused to draw an analogy between interspousal immunity and limitation legislation in Warren v. Warren [1972] Qd.R. 386, 388-389.

4 Warren v. Warren [1972] Qd.R. 386, 389-391.

5 [1974] V.R. 164, 166-167.

6 (1870) L.R. 6 Q.B. 1, 28-29.

7 The Halley (1868) L.R. 2 P.C. 193; Anderson v. Eric Anderson Radio &T.V. Pty Ltd (1965) 114 C.L.R. 20.

8 [1968] 2 Q.B. 1.

9 [1971] A.C. 356.

10 The cases are reviewed in Nygh, “Boys v. Chaplin in the Antipodes” (1973) 4 University of Tasmania Law Review 161.

11 [1974] V.R. 164, 167.

12 [1897] 2 Q.B. 231. Machado v. Fontes was applied in McLean v. Pettigrew [1945] 2 D.L.R. 65. In that case the court not only examined whether the defendant had committed a traffic offence by the lex loci delicti, but considered his acquittal by the foreign court irrelevant.

13 [1974] V.R. 164, 167.

14 Id. 168.

15 Diplock L.J. gave a strong dissenting judgment in support of this doctrine in the Court of Appeal in Boys v. Chaplin [1968] 2 Q.B. 1, 34ff. where he expressed the view that the second part of the rule is a choice of law rule. When a victim sues a tortfeasor for a foreign tort he is relying on a personal relationship governed by the lex loci delicti. The first part of the rule is a jurisdictional requirement.

16 [1974] V.R. 164, 168-169.

17 7 Id. 169-170.

18 [1971] A.C. 356, 384ff.

19 Id. 373ff.

20 Cf. [1974] V.R. 164, 168.

21 Id. 170-172.

22 (1870) L.R. 6 Q.B. 1, 28.

23 (1868) L.R. 2 P.C. 193, 202-203.

24 [1971] A.C. 356, 385.

25 (1965) 114 C.L.R. 20, 23, 41.

26 The rule is preceded by the words “... our courts do not undertake universal jurisdiction”: (1870) L.R. 6 Q.B. 1, 28.

27 The Privy Council spoke of the “right to sue”: (1868) L.R. 2 P.C. 193, 202, 204.

28 The cases are reviewed by Nygh, op. cit.

29 (1868) L.R. 2 P.C. 193, 203.

30 [1971) A.C. 356, 389.

31 (1967) 10 F.L.R. 151.

32 Supra n. 17.

33 Typically, in the areas of contributory negligence and interspousal immunity.

34 The problem of interspousal immunity will disappear when s. 119 of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) comes into operation; provided that section is held to be constitutionally valid and is not restrictively interpreted by the courts.S. 119 provides that “Either party to a marriage may bring proceedings in contract or in tort against the other party”.