NSW Caselaw
Supreme Court New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Bass Hill Investments Pty Ltd v JSJW Real Estate Pty Ltd [2022] NSWSC 1453 Hearing dates: 14-17, 21-23 February, 18-19 July and 29 August 2022 Date of orders: 25 October 2022 Decision date: 25 October 2022 Jurisdiction: Equity Before: Darke J Decision: See [132]-[134] Catchwords: CONTRACTS – contract for sale of land – payment of deposit – contract provides for payment of a deposit of $520,000 to vendor's agent – no payment made to vendor's agent – payments totalling $652,999 made in discharge of vendor's bank loan – whether payments should be characterised as payment of deposit – whether payments should instead be characterised as loans to vendor by shareholders – held that the parties intended the $652,999 to be paid instead of the $520,000 as provided under the contract – held that the payments discharged the purchaser's obligation to pay the deposit – vendor not entitled to terminate contract due to a failure to pay deposit CORPORATIONS – director's duties – duty to act in good faith and in the best interests of the company – duty to exercise powers for a proper purpose – director causes company to enter into lease of its land – lease said to be "manifestly disadvantageous" – not shown that director did not honestly believe he was acting in the best interests of the company – objective circumstances do not show that director was acting contrary to the best interests of the company – no improper purpose identified or established – no loss proven in any event CORPORATIONS – director's duties – duty to act in good faith and in the best interests of the company – duty to exercise powers for a proper purpose – director causes company to enter into contract for sale of its land – sale said to be to a purchaser in which director had an interest – sale not alleged to be at an undervalue – interest of director in purchaser an indirect security interest not an equity interest – not shown that director was acting otherwise than in good faith and in the best interests of the company as he perceived them – objective circumstances do not show that director was acting contrary to the best interests of the company – no improper purpose identified or established – no loss proven in any event Legislation Cited: Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), s 181(1), s 182 Cases Cited: Darvall v North Sydney Brick & Tile Co Ltd (1989) 16 NSWLR 260 Downer EDI Ltd v Gillies (2012) 92 ACSR 373; [2012] NSWCA 333 Grimaldi v Chameleon Mining NL (No 2) (2012) 200 FCR 296; [2012] FCAFC 6 Hart Security Australia Ltd v Boucousis (2016) 117 ACSR 408; [2016] NSWCA 307 Mehmet v Benson (1965) 113 CLR 295 Re Colorado Products Pty Ltd (in prov liq) (2014) 101 ACSR 233; [2014] NSWSC 789 Re IW4U Pty Ltd (in liq) (2021) 150 ACSR 146; [2021] NSWSC 40 Re Smith & Fawcett Ltd [1942] Ch 304 Ruthol Pty Ltd v Tricon (Australia) Pty Ltd (2005) 12 BPR 23,923; [2005] NSWCA 443 Westpac Banking Corporation v The Bell Group Ltd (in liq) (No 3) (2012) 44 WAR 1; [2012] WASCA 157 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Bass Hill Investments Pty Ltd (Plaintiff/First Cross-Defendant) JSJW Real Estate Pty Ltd (Defendant/Cross-Claimant) Ling Hua Zhu (Second Cross-Defendant) Representation: Counsel: Mr J Foley (Plaintiff/First Cross-Defendant) Mr T J Morahan (Defendant/Cross-Claimant) Mr P Lonergan (Second Cross-Defendant)
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate