The Property Investors Alliance Pty Ltd v C88 Project Pty Ltd (in liq) [2023] NSWCA 291

Court of Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: The Property Investors Alliance Pty Ltd v C88 Project Pty Ltd (in liq) [2023] NSWCA 291 Hearing dates: 13 February 2023 Decision date: 06 December 2023 Before: White JA at [1]; Kirk JA at [124]; Griffiths AJA at [152] Decision: (1) The appeal be allowed in part. (2) Set aside the order dated 12 August 2022. (3) Subject to order (4), remit the proceedings to the primary judge for the purpose of considering making orders for judicial sale. (4) Within 14 days hereof, the parties are to seek to agree the form of a declaratory order which gives effect to these reasons, as well as seek to agree costs of the proceeding both below and on appeal. If they are unable to reach agreement, each should within that time provide a brief written outline of submissions, not exceeding four pages in length, in support of their respective positions. The remaining issues will then be finalised on the papers and without a further oral hearing. Catchwords: CONTRACTS – Rectification – Common intention – Proof of common intention – Proof by inference – Where appellant and respondent executed Sole Agency Agreement for marketing and sale of units in residential development – Where appellant as selling agent entitled under Agreement to "Commission" upon sale of units – Where "Commission" as defined in Agreement limited to commission payable on certain units in development – Where appellant asserts common intention that "Commission" should have extended to commission accrued prior to execution of Agreement – Where directors and managers of respondent not called to give evidence on intention as at execution of Agreement – Whether uncontradicted evidence of sole director of appellant amounts to clear and convincing proof of common intention by inference – Relief in nature of rectification denied REAL PROPERTY – Caveats – Caveatable interests – Grant of caveatable interest – Where appellant asserts caveatable interest in nature of equitable charge entitling it to judicial sale of units in development – Where Sole Agency Agreement confers right on appellant to compel sale of specified units at fixed price to itself or others and offset outstanding commission against purchase price – Where Agreement authorises appellant to lodge caveats in order to protect its entitlement to Commission – Whether grant of right to compel sale constitutes express grant of equitable charge – Whether grant of right to lodge caveats constitutes implied grant of equitable charge – Appellant held impliedly to have been granted equitable charge over units in development AGENCY – Property, stock and business agents – Restrictions on real estate agent obtaining beneficial interest in property – Where appellant as real estate agent asserts rights as equitable chargee under Sole Agency Agreement – Where appellant had not obtained client's consent in writing in form approved by Secretary prior to execution of Agreement – Where interpretation clause in Agreement purports to sever any term or provision of agreement repugnant or contrary to any law – Whether appellant obtained beneficial interest in property in contravention of Property and Stock Agents Act 2002 (NSW) s 49(1) – Whether interpretation clause accordingly severs clauses of Agreement that impliedly grant equitable charge to appellant – Held that clauses impliedly granting equitable charge to appellant not severed from Agreement Legislation Cited: Property and Stock Agents Act 2002 (NSW), ss 46, 47, 48, 49 Real Property Act 1900 (NSW), ss 74F, 74MA Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) s 52 Cases Cited: Aged Care Services Pty Ltd v Kanning Services Pty Ltd (2013) 86 NSWLR 174; [2013] NSWCA 393 Australian Gypsum Ltd v Hume Steel Ltd (1930) 45 CLR 54; [1930] HCA 38 Bonhote v Henderson [1895] 1 Ch 742 Bonhote v Henderson [1895] 2 Ch 202 BP v State of New South Wales [2019] NSWCA 223 Branir Pty Ltd v Owston Nominees (No 2) Pty Ltd (2001) 117 FCR 424; [2001] FCA 1833 Broken Hill Proprietary Co Ltd v Commissioner of Stamp Duties [1998] 1 Qd R 452 Bush v National Australia Bank Ltd (1992) 35 NSWLR 390 Coleman v Bone (1996) 9 BPR 16,235 Concept Television Productions Pty Ltd v Australian Broadcasting Corporation (1988) 12 IPR 129 Crane v Hegeman-Harris Co Inc [1939] 1 All ER 662 CSR Ltd v Adecco (Australia) Pty Ltd [2017] NSWCA 121 Depsun Pty Ltd v Tahore Holdings Pty Ltd (1990) 5 BPR 11,314 Equuscorp Pty Ltd v Glengallan Investments Pty Ltd (2004) 218 CLR 471; [2004] HCA 55 Fowler v Fowler (1859) 4 De G & J 250; 45 ER 97 Gan v Xie [2023] NSWCA 163 Johnson v Synnex Australia Pty Ltd [2017] SASCFC 165 Johnson Matthey Ltd v AC Rochester Overseas Corporation (1990) 23 NSWLR 190 Jones v Dunkel (1959) 101 CLR 298; [1959] HCA 8 Joscelyne v Nissen [1970] 2 QB 86 Kane's Hire Pty Ltd v Anderson Aviation Australia Pty Ltd [2023] FCA 381 King Investment Solutions Pty Ltd v Hussain [2005] NSWSC 1076; (2005) 13 BPR 25,077 Kramer v Stone [2023] NSWCA 270 Kuhl v Zurich Financial Services Australia Ltd (2011) 243 CLR 361; [2011] HCA 11 Ling v Pang [2023] NSWCA 112 MacDonald v Shinko Australia Pty Ltd [1999] 2 Qd R 152 Mackay v Wilson (1947) 47 SR (NSW) 315 Maralinga Pty Ltd v Major Enterprises Pty Ltd (1973) 128 CLR 336; [1973] HCA 23 McNab v Director of Publication Prosecutions (NSW) (2021) 106 NSWLR 430; [2021] NSWCA 298 Morris Finance Ltd v Brown (2017) 252 FCR 557; [2017] FCAFC 97 Murphy v Wright (1992) 5 BPR 11,734 Newey v Westpac Banking Corporation [2014] NSWCA 319 Overlook v Foxtel [2002] NSWSC 17 Pukallus v Cameron (1982) 180 CLR 447; [1982] HCA 63 Redglove Projects Pty Ltd v Ngunnawal Local Aboriginal Land Council [2004] NSWSC 880; (2004) 12 BPR 22,319 RHG Mortgage Corporation Ltd v Ianni [2016] NSWCA 270 Roberts v Investwell Pty Ltd (in liq) [2012] NSWCA 134; (2012) 88 ACSR 689 Rockcote Enterprises Pty Ltd v FS Architects Pty Ltd [2008] NSWCA 39 RPS v The Queen (2000) 199 CLR 620; [2000] HCA 3 Ryledar Pty Ltd v Euphoric (2007) 69 NSWLR 603; [2007] NSWCA 65 Sagacious Legal Pty Ltd v Wesfarmers General Insurance Ltd [2011] FCAFC 53 Simic v New South Wales Land and Housing Corporation (2016) 260 CLR 85; [2016] HCA 47 Swiss Bank Corporation v Lloyd's Bank Ltd [1982] AC 584 Ta Lee Investment Pty Ltd v Antonios [2019] NSWCA 24; (2019) 19 BPR 39,153 Taleb v National Australia Bank Ltd (2011) 82 NSWLR 489; [2011] NSWSC 1562 Taylor v Johnson (1983) 151 CLR 422; [1983] HCA 5 The Property Investors Alliance Pty Ltd v C88 Project Pty Ltd [2021] NSWSC 1175 Troncone v Aliperti (1994) 6 BPR 13,291 Watson v Foxman (1995) 49 NSWLR 315 Zelden v Sewell Henamast Pty Ltd [2011] NSWCA 56 Texts Cited: Perry Herzfeld and Thomas Prince, Interpretation (2nd ed, 2020, Thomson Reuters) Category: Principal judgment Parties: The Property Investors Alliance Pty Ltd (Appellant) C88 Project Pty Ltd (in liq) (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: S A Lawrance SC with J C Lee (Appellant) D Neggo (Respondent)