NSW Caselaw
New South Wales Supreme Court
CITATION : Ring v R W & C D Investments Pty Ltd [2004] NSWSC 1045 HEARING DATE(S) : 03/11/04 JUDGMENT DATE : 11 November 2004 JURISDICTION: Equity Division JUDGMENT OF : Barrett J DECISION : Summons dismissed with costs
CATCHWORDS : LANDLORD AND TENANT - option to renew - whether option exercised within time - notice given by post - delivery and receipt established but evidence does not show precise date - determining such date by statutory means Conveyancing Act 1919, s.170 LEGISLATION CITED : Evidence Act 1995, s.160 Interpretation Act 1987, s.76 FAI General Insurance Co Ltd v Parras (2002) 55 NSWLR 498 Gilbert J McCaul (Aust) Pty Ltd v Pitt Club Ltd (1957) 59 SR (NSW) 122 CASES CITED : In re 88 Berkeley Road NW9 [1971] 1 Ch 648 Lolly Pops (Harbourside) Pty Ltd v Werncog Pty Ltd (1998) 9 BPR 16,361 Vescio v Westpac Banking Corporation [2003] NSWSC 1270 Wallville Pty Ltd v Liristis Holdings Pty Ltd (2001) 10 BPR 19,089 Lesley Anne Ring - Plaintiff PARTIES : R W & C D Investments Pty Ltd - First Defendant Rozlyn Gaye Holmes - Second Defendant FILE NUMBER(S) : SC 3747/04 COUNSEL : Mr C M Harris - Plaintiff Mr J B Turnbull - Defendant SOLICITORS : Stone & Partners - Plaintiff Hyczka Partners - Defendant
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES EQUITY DIVISION
BARRETT J
THURSDAY 11 NOVEMBER 2004
3747/04 – LESLEY ANNE RING v R W & C D INVESTMENTS PTY LTD & ANOR JUDGMENT
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