NSW Caselaw
Supreme Court New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: State of New South Wales v Schofields Nominee No.5 Pty Ltd [2024] NSWSC 1590 Hearing dates: 14, 16-17 October 2024, 3-4 December 2024 Date of orders: 13 December 2024 Decision date: 13 December 2024 Jurisdiction: Equity - Real Property List Before: Peden J Decision: At [109] Catchwords: CONTRACTS — Remedies — Liquidated damages — Penalty — Whether penalty doctrine engaged by obligation to pay compensation, determined by an expert valuation process, following plaintiff's non-fulfilment of promise to construct and dedicate a public road and defendant's issuance of notice demanding payment — Whether compensation clause protects defendant's legitimate interests — Whether compensation clause is out of all proportion with impact on plaintiff's legitimate interests — Appropriate remedy if clause properly characterised as penal VALUATION — Valuer — Whether valuation in conformity with agreement — Whether experts did not comply with contractual valuation process by failing to consider relevant information and/or failing to "state the basis" of their determination — Appropriate relief if valuers erred CONTRACTS — Misleading conduct under statute — Misleading or deceptive conduct — Representations — Whether plaintiff represented that defendant entitled to compensation as determined by valuation or that it would not challenge compensation clause as penal — Whether alleged representations misleading or deceptive Legislation Cited: Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW) Conveyancing Act 1919 (NSW) s 88K Land Acquisition (Just Terms Compensation) Act 1991 (NSW) ss 54, 55 Cases Cited: Acron Pacific Ltd v Offshore Oil NL (1985) 157 CLR 514 AGL Victoria Pty Ltd v SPI Networks (Gas) Pty Ltd [2006] VSCA 173 AMEV-UDC Finance Ltd v Austin (1986) 162 CLR 170 Andrews v Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Ltd (2012) 247 CLR 205 Arab Bank Australia Ltd v Sayde Developments Pty Ltd (2016) 93 NSWLR 231 Australia Capital Financial Management Pty Ltd v Linfield Developments Pty Ltd [2017] NSWCA 99 Australian Vintage Ltd v Belvino Investments No 2 Pty Ltd (2015) 90 NSWLR 367 Bartier Perry Pty Ltd v Paltos [2021] NSWCA 158 Booker Industries Pty Ltd v Wilson Parking (Qld) Pty Ltd (1982) 149 CLR 600 Café Du Liban Pty Ltd v Bespoke Garage Pty Ltd [2017] NSWSC 779 Candoora No 19 Pty Ltd v Freixenet Australasia Pty Ltd [2008] VSC 478 Cavendish Square Holding BV v Makdessi [2016] AC 1172 Chand v Commonwealth Bank of Australia [2015] NSWCA 181 Cherry v Steele-Park (2017) 96 NSWLR 548 Clydebank Engineering and Shipbuilding Company v Don Jose Ramos Yzquierdo Y Castaneda [1905] AC 6 Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Co Ltd v New Garage and Motor Co Ltd [1915] AC 79 Electricity Generation Corporation v Woodside Energy Ltd (2014) 251 CLR 640 Holt v Cox (1997) 23 ACSR 590 International Petroleum Investment Company v Independent Public Business Corp of Papua New Guinea [2015] NSWCA 363 J Family Motel Group Pty Ltd v Baset Super Pty Ltd [2024] NSWSC 1251 Kanivah Holdings Pty Ltd v Holdsworth Properties Pty Ltd [2002] NSWCA 180 Legal & General Life of Australia Ltd v A Hudson Pty Ltd (1985) 1 NSWLR 314 Mount Bruce Mining Pty Ltd v Wright Prospecting Pty Ltd (2015) 256 CLR 104 O'Dea v Allstates Leasing System (WA) Pty Ltd (1983) 152 CLR 359 Paciocco v Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Ltd (2016) 258 CLR 525 QNI Resources Pty Ltd v North Queensland Pipeline No 1 Pty Ltd (2022) 11 QR 648 Strike Australia Pty Ltd v Data Base Corporate Pty Ltd [2019] NSWCA 205 Sudbrook Trading Ltd v Eggleton [1983] 1 AC 444 United Petroleum Investment Company v Independent Public Business Corporation of Papua New Guinea [2014] NSWSC 1289 Waterside Workers' Federation of Australia v Stewart (1919) 27 CLR 119 Texts Cited: JW Carter, Wayne Courtney and GJ Tolhurst, "Assessment of Contractual Penalties: Dunlop Deflated" (2017) 34 Journal of Contract Law 4 Category: Principal judgment Parties: State of New South Wales (Plaintiff) Schofields Nominee No.5 Pty Ltd (First Defendant) JKN Station Pty Ltd (in liq) (Second Defendant) Representation: Counsel: S Docker SC and P Lin (Plaintiff) G A Sirtes SC and R L Gall (First 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