Matthew McDonald | Partner Dip Law (LPAB) 1994 t: 61 (2) 8023 7905 e: matthew.mcdonald@curwoods.com.au   Professional Indemnity | Public & Products Liability

Main areas of practice

Insurance law with a focus on negligence, nuisance, intentional torts, defamation, breach of statutory duty, contract law, occupational health & safety law, anti-discrimination law, strata law and local government law.

Background

Matthew joined the firm from McCulloch & Buggy Lawyers, where he had been since 1994, the last 8 years as a partner.  Matthew has developed a practice acting on behalf of employers, self-insured entities, general insurers, underwriting agencies and government agencies.  He has specialised in public and product liability and professional negligence.  Matthew enjoys a reputation for thoroughness and believes in exceeding clients’ expectations.

Experience

Matthew has significant experience serving the insurance and related industries.  Examples of the types of matters Matthew has handled include:

• Acted for the insurer of the head contractor on a work site and one of its related companies.  The issues included whether indemnity was available.  It was then necessary to determine whether there was any liability on the part of the head contractor, and whether it was entitled to contribution or indemnity.  The principles of dual insurance were considered.  It was necessary to assess damages under three different statutory schemes.
• Acted for the manufacturer and supplier of dyes used in plastic monofilament, which was, in turn, knitted into shade cloth.  The shade cloth was made into massive sails that were exported to Texas for use in car yards.  The shade cloth faded rapidly and ultimately failed, resulting in significant damage to numerous cars, loss of profits and lost business opportunities.
• Acted for a barrister who was sued by a former client whose damages were assessed by the Trial Judge in excess of the jurisdictional limit of the District Court.  She alleged the barrister had failed to advise her to seek consent to unlimited jurisdiction or to transfer the matter to the Supreme Court.  The matter involved consideration of the principles of a barrister’s duty and loss of opportunity.
• A client had a significant sum of money stolen from the possession of the security company contracted to transport the money.  Matthew brought claims against the security company and its insurer.  The insurer sought to apply dual insurance.  The client was a member of a mutual discretionary fund and Matthew was required to advise on whether its arrangements amounted to an insurance policy and, if so, whether dual insurance applied.

Professional activities

Member, Australian Insurance Law Association (AILA)

Back