Manno v Manno [2016] NSWSC 493

Supreme Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Manno v Manno [2016] NSWSC 493 Hearing dates: 12-14 April 2016 Decision date: 22 April 2016 Jurisdiction: Equity - Expedition List Before: Stevenson J Decision: Further amended statement of claim dismissed Catchwords: EQUITY - equitable estoppel – proprietary estoppel - family relationship - whether parents represented to adult son that they would subdivide land they owned and give him and his siblings a lot from the subdivision - whether any such representation relied on - subdivision did not proceed - whether unconscionable for parents not to honour any representation Legislation Cited: Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW) Cases Cited: Ashton v Pratt [2015] NSWCA 12 Commonwealth v Verwayen (1990) 170 CLR 394 Walton v Walton (Court of Appeal of England and Wales, 14 April 1994, unrep) Waltons Stores (Interstate) Ltd v Maher [1988] HCA 7; (1988) 164 CLR 387 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Joseph Manno (Plaintiff) Estate of the late Salvatore Manno (also known as Sam Manno) (First Defendant) Gaetana Manno (Second Defendant) Representation: Counsel: F F F Salama (Plaintiff) D M Flaherty with L Do (Defendants)

Solicitors: ClarkeKann (Plaintiff) Albert A Macri & Co (Defendants) File Number(s): SC 2014/373004

Judgment 1. The plaintiff, Mr Joseph Manno, claims that his father and mother, the defendants, represented to him that they would subdivide land they owned at Edmondson Park and give him (and each of his two siblings) a lot from the subdivision. Many years later, the parents sold the land without subdividing it. Mr Manno claims that, in the events that have happened, his parents are estopped from denying that he is entitled to, or should be compensated for the value of "a subdivided lot". 2. In my opinion, Mr Manno's claim should be dismissed.