NSW Caselaw
Reported Decision : [2000] 10 BPR 18,027 [2000] NSW ConvR 55-937
New South Wales Court of Appeal
CITATION : Fliegner v MNM Pty Ltd trading as Raine & Horne Glebe [2000] NSWCA 83 FILE NUMBER(S) : CA 40634/98 HEARING DATE(S) : 20/03/00 JUDGMENT DATE : 6 April 2000
Joseph Fliegner PARTIES : Annette Fliegner (Appellants)
MNM Pty Limited trading as Raine & Horne Glebe (Respondent) JUDGMENT OF : Priestley JA at 1; Fitzgerald JA at 2; Heydon JA at 20
LOWER COURT JURISDICTION : District Court LOWER COURT DC 7504/96 FILE NUMBER(S) : LOWER COURT Sinclair DCJ JUDICIAL OFFICER :
COUNSEL : R Colquhoun/T Howard (Appellants) R G McHugh (Respondent) SOLICITORS : Colquhoun & Colquhoun (Appellants) Murray Stewart & Fogarty (Respondent) CATCHWORDS : Misleading and deceptive conduct - Representations as to the characteristics of a property - Whether the plaintiffs relied upon the representations - Whether waterfront property - Meaning of waterfront property - Position of high water mark - Doctrine of accretion - Loss of riparian rights - Location of boundaries of property - ND LEGISLATION CITED : Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) s 4(2)(a) and (c), s 52, s 53A(1)(b), s 82 Real Property Act 1900 (NSW) CASES CITED: Coulton v Holcombe (1986) 162 CLR 1 DECISION : Appeal dismissed; the appellants to pay the respondent's costs of the appeal
THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES COURT OF APPEAL
CA 40634/98 DC 7504/96
PRIESTLEY JA FITZGERALD JA HEYDON JA
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