De Rucci International Pty Ltd v Zhu & Ors [2020] NSWSC 374

Supreme Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: De Rucci International Pty Ltd v Zhu & Ors [2020] NSWSC 374 Hearing dates: 22, 27 November and 9 December 2019 Date of orders: 08 April 2020 Decision date: 08 April 2020 Jurisdiction: Common Law Before: Rothman J Decision: (1) The Court answers the following question in the following manner: "which of the plaintiff or one or other of the defendants has title to the De Rucci branded stock at the premises in Moore Park between 20 October 2016 and 22 November 2019 and which party has ownership of the funds accumulated from the sale thereof."

Answer: The question is not answered.

(2) Costs are costs in the cause Catchwords: CONTRACTS – Interpretation – management agreement – objective determination of parties' intention – mercantile agency – ownership of property purchased from nominated business account operated by agent in accordance with agreement – separate question unable to be answered because rights may depend on the nature and effect of termination about which no party adduced satisfactory evidence - preliminary question not answered. Legislation Cited: Factors (Mercantile Agents) Act 1923 (NSW) Sale of Goods Act 1923 (NSW), s 23 Cases Cited: Bruce v Good [1917] NZLR 514 Codelfa Construction Pty Ltd v State Rail Authority (NSW) (1982) 149 CLR 337; [1982] HCA 24 Custom Credit Corporation Ltd v Griffith-Jury Co Pty Ltd [1965] WAR 77 De Rucci International Pty Ltd v Zhu [2019] NSWSC 1375 Electricity Generation Corporation v Woodside Energy Ltd (2014) 251 CLR 640; [2014] HCA 7 Ex parte Bright (1878) 10 Ch D 566 Fraser-Ramsay (New Zealand) (Ltd) v De Renzy (1912) 32 NZLR 553 Hill v Venning (1979) 4 ACLR 555 Hospital Products Ltd v United States Surgical Corporation (1984) 156 CLR 41; [1984] HCA 64 Jones v Canavan (1972) 2 NSWLR 236 Livingstone v Ross [1901] AC 327 Maynegrain Pty Ltd v Compafina Bank [1982] 2 NSWLR 141 McDonald v Dennys Lascelles Ltd (1933) 48 CLR 457; [1933] HCA 25 Mercantile Credits Ltd v Jarden Morgan Australia Ltd [1991] 1 Qd R 407; (1990) 1 ACSR 805; 8 ACLC 431 Mooney v Williams (1905) 3 CLR 1; [1905] HCA 34 Pacific Carriers Ltd v BNP Paribas (2004) 218 CLR 451; [2004] HCA 35 Re Clune; Ex parte Verge v Isabella Nominees Pty Ltd (in liq) (1988) 14 ACLR 261 Toll (FGCT) Pty Ltd v Alphapharm Pty Ltd (2004) 219 CLR 165; [2004] HCA 52 Tonto Home Loans Australia Pty Ltd v Tavares [2011] NSWCA 389 Weiner v Harris [1910] 1 KB 285 W T Lamb & Sons v Goring Brick Company Ltd [1932] 1 KB 710 Texts Cited: G E Dal Pont (ed), Law of Agency (3rd ed, 2014, LexisNexis Butterworths) Halsbury's Laws of Australia Category: Principal judgment Parties: Plaintiff: De Rucci International Pty Ltd First Defendant: Lucy Zhu Second Defendant: HQ Living Pty Ltd Third Defendant: Singways (Moore Park) Pty Ltd Representation: Counsel: A. Duc (plaintiff) until 9 December 2019, then unrepresented L. Zhu (self-represented)