Page:Potts v National Australia Bank Limited.pdf/7

Gageler CJ Gordon J Edelman J Steward J Gleeson J

If DSHE had been found to have engaged in misleading or deceptive conduct by any of these omissions, questions of public importance may have arisen as to the extent of culpability of DSHE and whether DSHE was a concurrent wrongdoer in relation to NAB's claim against Mr Potts, as a person "whose acts or omissions … caused, independently of [Mr Potts] or jointly", the loss that was the subject of the claim. In the absence of an adequate factual basis for considering that issue, the case was not an appropriate vehicle to consider that question.

Accordingly, the proper course is for the grant of special leave to be revoked. Mr Potts must pay the costs of the proceeding in this Court.