NSW Caselaw
Supreme Court New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Prospect Resources v Molyneux [2014] NSWSC 1096 Hearing dates: 04/08/2014, 05/08/2014 Decision date: 15 August 2014 Jurisdiction: Equity Division - Commercial List Before: McDougall J Decision: Summons dismissed with costs. Catchwords: CONTRACTS - general contractual principles - conditions precedent - whether conditions precedent had been satisfied or waived - whether conditions were 'precedent' or 'subsequent' - where condition precedent expressly for the benefit of one party - where conditions precedent include a requirement to reasonably satisfy a party that conditions precedent in another agreement, involving different parties, had been satisfied or waived - where parties to other agreement entered into deed to postpone date for compliance with conditions precedent - where parties to other agreement signed letter indicating conditions precedent had been satisfied - whether parties could be 'reasonably satisfied' of conditions precedent which had not, in fact, be satisfied - whether extending time for fulfilment of conditions precedent amounted to a waiver of conditions precedent - whether letter signed by parties to other agreement sufficient to 'reasonably satisfy' of fulfilment of conditions precedent where parties had a financial interest in fulfilment of the agreement EQUITY - equitable remedies - specific performance - damages - whether to grant damages or specific performance of a subscription agreement - whether a company's unissued capital has any value Cases Cited: Agricultural and Rural Finance Pty Ltd v Gardiner (2008) 238 CLR 570 Expense Reduction Analysts Group Pty Ltd v Armstrong Strategic Management and Marketing Pty Ltd (2013) 250 CLR 303 Gange v Sullivan (1966) 116 CLR 418 Hunt v Wilson [1978] 2 NZLR 261 Perri v Coolangatta Investments Pty Limited (1982) 149 CLR 537 Pilmer v Duke Group Limited (in Liquidation) (2001) 207 CLR 165 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Prospect Resources Limited (Plaintiff) Alexander Molyneux (First Defendant) Blumont Group Ltd (Second Defendant) Pacific Advisers Pty Ltd (Third Defendant) Representation: Counsel: JC Giles (Plaintiff) A Willinge (First, Second and Third Defendants) Solicitors: Whittens Lawyers and Consultants (Plaintiff) Allion Legal (First, Second and Third Defendants) File Number(s): 2013/360199
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