In such cases, the plaintiff and defendant may have a 'shared responsibility': Tai v Hatzistavrou  NSWCA
306,  (Priestley JA).
The judgment of Patsalis v State of New South Wales  NSWCA
307 ('Patsalis') is a decision of significance for the law in New South Wales for various reasons.
(112.) In specific relation to torture, see Zhang  NSWCA
Tabet  NSWCA
76 (noting definition of harm for purposes of tort reform across Australia does not include a risk of physical or mental injury).
Important legal concerns may arise even where provision for employee financial participation is made not through enterprise agreements but through quite separate and private contractual arrangements, giving rise to uncertainty as to their operation and subsequent litigation (see, eg, Bredel v Moore Business Systems Australia  NSWCA
117; Lau v Bob Jane T-Marts  VSC 69).
(48) Solution 6 Holdings Limited & Ors v Industrial Relations Commission of NSW & Ors  NSWCA
(2) For example, the absence of deception in Thorne is somewhat problematic given the importance that it has been afforded in cases like Louth v Diprose (1992) 175 CLR 621, Mackintosh v Johnson (2013) VSCA 10 and Wu v Ling  NSWCA
A classification derived from House along these lines was made and applied in Micallef v ICI Australia Operations Pty Ltd  NSWCA
274,  and affirmed in R v Ford (2009) 273 ALR 286, 306-7 .
(81) Voir par ex Seltsam Pty Ltd v McGuinness,  NSWCA
29 au para 109, 49 NSWLR 262; Sabatino (Tuteur a l'instance) v New South Wales & Ors,  NSWCA
380 au para 70 (disponible sur AustLII).
(95.) See Leerdam v Noori,  NSWCA
90, Spigelman CJ ("[i]n almost all cases the answer will be obvious" at para 3).
(151) Irvine v Irvine  NSWSC 592 (16 June 2008) (Barrett J); Aboody v Ryan  NSWCA
395 (4 December 2012).
(139) Murakami v Wiryadi  NSWCA
7,  (Spigelman CJ).