NSW Caselaw
New South Wales District Court
CITATION: Wood & Anor v Balfour & Anor [2010] NSWDC 139
HEARING DATE(S): 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 29 March and 27 April 2010
JUDGMENT DATE: 9 July 2010
JURISDICTION: Civil
JUDGMENT OF: Levy SC DCJ
1. Verdict and judgment for the defendants; DECISION: 2. The plaintiffs are to pay the costs of the defendants on the ordinary basis unless otherwise ordered; 3. The exhibits may be returned; 4. Liberty to apply on 7 days notice if further orders are required.
CATCHWORDS: TORTS – action framed in deceit – purchase of domestic dwelling – premises affected by past termite activity – purchasers claimed vendors acted fraudulently to cover up and conceal damage due to past termite activity to induce purchasers to buy – whether deceit established – relevance of maxim of caveat emptor – operation of Special Condition 3 of contract for sale – standard of proof required to establish deceit – equivalent to an allegation of fraud - DAMAGES – measure of damages – valuation of property assuming no termite damage compared to valuation taking into account termite damage.
LEGISLATION CITED: Evidence Act 1995, s 135
AIC Ltd v ITS Testing Services (UK) Limited [2006] EWCA Civ 1601; [2007] 1 All ER (Comm) 667 Akerhielm v De Mare (1959) AC 789 Angus v Clifford [1891] 2 Ch 449 Armstrong v Strain [1951] 1 TLR 856 at 871 Australian Steel & Mining Corporation Pty Limited v Corben [1974] 2 NSWLR 202 Briginshaw v Briginshaw [1938] HCA 34; (1938) 60 CLR 336 Civil Service Co-operative Society of Victoria Ltd v Blyth [1914] HCA 17; (1914) 17 CLR 601 Clancy v Prince & Ors [2001] NSWSC 85 Demagogue Pty Ltd v Ramensky (1992) 39 FCR 31 CASES CITED: Derry v Peek [1889] UKHL 1; (1889) 14 AC 337 Edgington v Fitzmaurice (1885) 29 ChD 459 Gould v Vaggelos [1985] HCA 85; (1984) 157 CLR 215 Jennings v Zilahi-Kiss (1972) 2 SASR 493 John McGrath Motors (Canberra) Pty Ltd v Applebee [1964] HCA 1; (1964) 110 CLR 656 Krakowski v Eurolynx Properties Pty Ltd [1995] HCA 68; (1995) 183 CLR 564 Luxton v Vines [1952] HCA 19; (1952) 85 CLR 353 Oraka Holdings Pty Ltd v Leda Holdings (1997) ATPR 41-558 Oudaille v Lawson [1972] NZLR 259 Vairy v Wyong Shire Council [2005] HCA 62; (2005) 223 CLR 442
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