Thompson v Palmer [1933] HCA 61

> Ap Cons Sons Cons Baions | Hoffman, Re; vores ps Stores 37 Nominee ht Bz) Sepone er oko, elena, SRE i Sdiling ss it 497: TOACLR 387 ALR 513 A AURIS ASC y Appl Prany Wight Marlborough — Slartborough or.) ERY OF AUSTRALIA. HIGHS' Pate 507

ymo

ft femitory Fol

Pacific

Mine "ARH Hi, See, fon

mi" fier litle GR See lay he c

Mitiensy MB ae

Appl Docirieve ludy Refd to pee a Earls Yl A are Accep- BeFidiahe SIRISD — BN Sar Hfiabishs Fore A (5) AG IPR OFR 1045 Australialra Financ Pi 3 \ Harbord Lid Bao Geen 6s Sikshe 30 Sk [HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA.) Re ee, 0. - APPELLANT; DEFENDANT, AND MER Pee ee ea et, . RESPONDENT.

ON APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES.

and Purchaser—Vendor's lien—Conflicting equities—Transfer of mortgages— Hf. 0. or A. Transfer of legal title completed by registration—Fraud of common agent—Claim 1933, by purchaser that vendor's conduct enabled fraud—Waiver or abandonment of a Estoppel—Personal liability of purchaser. Sypyey,

Aug. 14; 'Trustees of a settlement lent two sums of £600 each to G.on the security 'Dee 14.

respectively of two memoranda of mortgage under the Real Property Act 1900 == —— (N.S.W.) over land comprised in two certificates of title, each of which mort- Pith "ueate 'gages was duly registered. Subsequently the trustees transferred the mortgages *™4 Mpyieman 'to the appellant, with a receipt for consideration money of £1,200 endorsed -onthetransfer, and the transfer was subsequently registered.) At the time of the - transfer no actual cash payment was in fact made by the appellant, but moneys "exceeding the sum of £1,200 at that time were owed by the solicitor to the

appellant, though such moneys had previously been misappropriated by him.

he solicitor procured certain security to be given by his mother and his 'managing clerk to one of the trustees to cover the general shortage in respect of __ (amongst others) the investments which the trustees had made. The solicitor 'was declared bankrupt shortly after the mortgages were handed to the appellant. The present trustee of the settlement claimed that he was entitled, as unpaid _ vendor, to enforce a vendor's lien. The mortgages and the certificate of - title were in the appellant's possession.