← All Authorities
Australia Leading Case minority protectioncompensatory damagesenrichment at the expense of

Palmer v Ayres

(2017) 259 CLR 478
JurisdictionAustralia
CourtHigh Court of Australia
Year2017
StatusBinding authority

Summary

High Court of Australia held the reflective loss principle (Prudential Assurance rule) does not apply in Australia, permitting shareholders to recover losses independently of the company.

Key Principle

shareholder class action; reflective loss principle; no bar in Australia; Prudential principle not adopted

Area of Law

procedure

Related Cases

Getswift Ltd v Webb (2022) 276 CLR 553

High Court of Australia held there is no power to make a common fund order in favour of litigation funders at the interlocutory stage of a class action.

UBS AG v Tyne (2018) 265 CLR 77

Anshun estoppel bars relitigation where it was unreasonable not to raise the issue in earlier proceedings; re-litigation may also constitute abuse of process.

Tomlinson v Ramsey Food Processing Pty Ltd (2015) 256 CLR 507

High Court of Australia confirmed principles of issue estoppel, merger of cause of action in judgment, and the Henderson v Henderson abuse of process doctrine in Australian law.

Ask CommonBench about this case

Get a detailed analysis of Palmer v Ayres and how it applies to your situation.

Explain Palmer v Ayres