Court of Appeal (NSW)
[2015] NSWCA 12


australia-28586_640.png

Case details

Court
Court of Appeal
Supreme Court of NSW

Citations
[2015] NSWCA 12

Judges
Bathurst CJ
McColl JA
Meagher JA

Result
Appeal dismissed

Issues
Intention to create legal relations
Certainty
Estoppel
Unconscionability

Link to case
NSW Caselaw

 

Overview

Catchwords

CONTRACTS – intention – family arrangements - whether intention to create legal relations in a domestic or social context – role of presumptions

CONTRACTS – intention to create legal relations – objective test – oral agreement – imprecise terms - language of obligation – nature of arrangement – where some obligations unenforceable

CONTRACTS – certainty – imprecise terms – language of obligation

CONTRACTS – accord and satisfaction – release – whether there was an offer and acceptance

CONTRACTS – unconscionability – unfair or oppressive conduct – whether evidence of undue pressure

EQUITY – estoppel - assumption or representation – degree of certainty required – nature of transaction - domestic or commercial

EQUITY - estoppel – promissory estoppel – whether must be defensive or negative in substance

EQUITY – estoppel – detriment – whether any detrimental reliance – nature of promises

EQUITY – trusts – intention to create a trust – whether fiduciary obligation breached

APPEAL – civil – rejection of evidence at trial – whether trial judge erred - deference to trial judge – advantage of seeing witness

Held (on issue of intention)

The mere fact that this was a family arrangement did give rise to a presumption that there was no intention; it is part of the relevant circumstances.

In this case there was no intention (even if there was, the contract was void for uncertainty).

Relevant factors were the lack of detail, including in relation to important terms, duration and improbability of promisor’s intention to be bound to what as essentially an unenforceable arrangement.

Held (other grounds)

Other grounds of appeal (estoppel, accord and satisfaction and unconscionable conduct) also failed.


Previous
Previous

ANZ v Frost Holdings Pty Ltd

Next
Next

Associated Newspapers Ltd v Bancks