NSW Caselaw
New South Wales Supreme Court
CITATION : Rahnam Investments Pty Ltd v Esplin & Anor [2004] NSWSC 529 HEARING DATE(S) : 25/05/04, 26/05/04 JUDGMENT DATE : 22 June 2004 JURISDICTION: Equity Division JUDGMENT OF : Barrett J DECISION : Claims based on resulting and constructive trusts dismissed
CATCHWORDS : TRUSTS AND TRUSTEES - implied trusts - whether vendor's solicitors holding deposits under contracts for sale of lots in subdivision became trustee of such moneys for second mortgagee - whether Quistclose trust or other resulting trust arose - whether constructive trust arose because of unconscionability LEGISLATION CITED : Evidence Act 1995, s.79 Australian Broadcasting Commission v Lenah Game Meats Pty Ltd (2001) 208 CLR 199 Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v C G Berbatis Holdings Pty Ltd (2003) 77 ALJR 926 Barclays Bank Ltd v Quistclose Investments Ltd [1970] AC 567 CASES CITED : Guimelli v Guimelli (1998) 196 CLR 101 Siebe Gorman & Co Ltd v Barclays Bank Ltd [1979] 2 Lloyd's Rep 142 In re Spectrum Plus Ltd [2004] EWCA Civ 670 Twinsectra Ltd v Yardley [2002] 2 AC 164 Rahnam Investments Pty Limited - Plaintiff PARTIES : Donald Phillip Reid Esplin - First Defendant Stephen John Rush - Second Defendant FILE NUMBER(S) : SC 1744/04 COUNSEL : Mr J L Trew QC - Plaintiff Mr P M Biscoe QC/Mr C Mantziaris - Defendants SOLICITORS : Abadee, Dresdner & Freeman - Plaintiff Esplins - Defendants
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES EQUITY DIVISION
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