HEARSE & ANOR v STAUNTON & ORS [2010] NSWSC 954

New South Wales Supreme Court

CITATION : HEARSE & ANOR v STAUNTON & ORS [2010] NSWSC 954

HEARING DATE(S) : Thursday 15 July 2010

JUDGMENT DATE : 1 September 2010

JURISDICTION : Common Law

JUDGMENT OF : Hall J at 1

In light of the conclusions expressed above, namely:- (1) that the defendant solicitors did not warrant or represent as alleged that they had the authority of Mrs Pallister to act for her as purchaser of the property; DECISION : (2) that they did not warrant or represent that they had Mrs Pallister's authority to make a binding contract on her behalf for the purpose of making her a co-purchaser of the property; (3) that the evidence does not establish that the parties had an intention to create contractual relations for the purchase of the property by Mrs Pallister, there should be judgment in favour of the third, fourth and fifth defendants and I so order.

CATCHWORDS : CONTRACT – breach of warranty of authority – whether solicitor acting for the purchaser of a residential property represented or warranted that he had the authority to act for the purchaser's wife in contracting on her behalf so as to make her a co-purchaser of the property - CONSTRUCTION OF DOCUMENTS – issues of construction of correspondence – request by letter to vendors' solicitor to have the purchaser's wife "added … as a joint purchaser pursuant to s.18(3) of the Duties Act 1997 …" – inconsistency in the letter – s.18(3) permitting exemption from duty when a "related person" is added to the transfer who is not a party to the contract – principles relevant to breach of authority – presumption that a solicitor does not have implied or ostensible authority to contract on behalf of a client in relation to a sale of land not rebutted – the solicitor did not make a representation or warranty as alleged – further no evidence of an intention to contract