Smith v Leon Dupuy Dozer Hire Pty Ltd [2000] VSC 212

Liebe v Molloy [1906] HCA 67; (1906) 4 CLR 347

Lovell v Lovell [1950] HCA 52; (1950) 81 CLR 513

40. Given what I have found to be the finding of the Magistrate, and his other findings set out in paragraph 6 above, I am satisfied that he was correct in the application of Liebe v Molloy to the work done on 19 and 20 July 1998. The answer to question (a) is therefore No. Further, I accept the submission of Mr Stirling that if the claim of LDDH for $1625 were to be founded, not on the implication of a contract on Liebe v Molloy principles, but on the basis of a quantum meruit in terms of Pavey & Matthews Pty Ltd v Paul [1987] HCA 5; (1987) 162 CLR 221, that claim should equally succeed.

(1954) 90 CLR 613

(1906) 4 CLR 347

(1950) 81 CLR 513

(1987) 162 CLR 221