NSW Caselaw
New South Wales Supreme Court
CITATION : Irvine v Irvine [2008] NSWSC 592
HEARING DATE(S) : 03/06/08, 04/06/08
JUDGMENT DATE : 16 June 2008
JURISDICTION : Equity Division
JUDGMENT OF : Barrett J
DECISION : Order that defendants transfer house property to plaintiff and ancillary orders
CATCHWORDS : CONTRACTS - unjust contracts - statutory remedies - sale by 90 year old woman of home and virtually only asset to nephew and his sons for $1.00 - oral promise by them to allow her to remain there for life - whether contract - whether unjust within Contracts Review Act 1980 s 7 - EQUITY - unconscionable dealing - clearly improvident transaction - whether position of special disadvantage
LEGISLATION CITED : Contracts Review Act 1980. ss 4, 7, 9, 19 Real Property Act 1900
CATEGORY : Principal judgment
Bridgewater v Leahy [1998] HCA 66; (1998) 194 CLR 457 Hancock v Wilson [1956] St R Qd 266 CASES CITED : Kosmas v Cherote (unreported, NSWSC, 14 March 1996) Perpetual Trustee Co Ltd v Koshaba [2006] NSWCA 41 West v AGC (Advances) Ltd (1986) 5 NSWLR 610 Toscano v Holland Securities Pty Ltd (1985) 1 NSWLR 145
Rosa Anne Irvine - Plaintiff PARTIES : Maxwell Charles James Irvine - First Defendant Peter Charles Irvine - Second Defendant Michael James Irvine - Third Defendant
FILE NUMBER(S) : SC 1516/07
COUNSEL : Ms E A Cohen - Plaintiff Mr R J M Foord - Defendants
SOLICITORS : DLA Phillips Fox - Plaintiff Rickards Whiteley - Defendants
- 4 - 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