| Salmon
v Osmond (NSWCA) - succession - costs - offers of compromise -
family provision order extending to provision of own home |
| Chandler
v Coulson (NSWSC) - succession - family provision order in favour
of de facto partner of deceased |
| New
South Wales Land and Housing Corporation v Australia and New Zealand Banking
Group Ltd (NSWSC) - contract - guarantee - misnomer of beneficiary
of bank guarantee corrected |
| Mitchell
v Moore (NSWSC) - pleadings - statement of claim disclosed no
reasonable cause of action - claim struck out - leave to replead |
| Idameneo
(No 123) Pty Ltd v Suszko (SASC) - pleadings - contract -
application to file and serve amended defence, set-off and counterclaim |
| Summaries With Link (Five Minute Read) |
Salmon
v Osmond
[2015] NSWCA 42
Court of Appeal of New South Wales
Beazley P; McColl & Gleeson JJA
Succession - deceased survived by wife
and children - made provision for wife and five of his seven children - two of
deceased’s daughters sought additional provision under s59 Succession Act 2006 (NSW) - primary judge dismissed one daughter’s
claim and allowed provision for other daughter in form of legacy - executors
appealed - testator’s wishes - additional evidence - updated financial
positions of parties - costs at first instance and on appeal - effect of offers
of compromise - held: provision for daughter disproportionately high in context
of son’s competing claim - primary judge erred in finding that proper provision
to daughter required ensuring she had her own house - trial judge erred in
finding offers of compromise to daughter whose claim was dismissed were not
genuine - appeal allowed - provision made for daughter in form of legacy -
costs orders made.
Salmon
|
Chandler
v Coulson
[2015] NSWSC 172
Supreme Court of New South Wales
Pembroke J
Succession - plaintiff claimed family
provision order out of deceased’s estate pursuant to s59 Succession Act 2006 (NSW) - plaintiff contended he was eligible to
make claim because he was in a de facto relationship with deceased at time of
her death - freedom of testamentary disposition - held: Court satisfied
plaintiff and deceased living in de facto marriage at time of her death - wise
and just testatrix in deceased’s position would have made provision for
plaintiff in Will to reflect care and support he provided, particularly when
deceased was in ill health - family provision order granted.
Chandler
|
New
South Wales Land and Housing Corporation v Australia and New Zealand Banking
Group Ltd
[2015] NSWSC 176
Supreme Court of New South Wales
Kunc J
Contract - plaintiff Corporation claimed
it was intended beneficiary of two guarantees issued by bank at request of
first defendant customer - bank cross-claimed against customer and other
cross-defendants in respect of any liability bank might have to corporation
under guarantees - guarantees issued in favour of nonexistent “New South Wales
Land & Housing Department” - cross-defendants accepted that, if bank liable
to corporation, then their clients liable to indemnify bank - whether bank
liable to plaintiff under the guarantees - misnomer and absurdity - held: on
its proper construction “New South Wales Land & Housing Department Trading
As Housing NSW ABN 45754121940” in guarantees and Indemnity meant the Corporation
- Corporation had complied with guarantees - bank liable to Corporation -
cross-defendants liable to bank.
New South Wales Land and Housing
Corporation
|
Mitchell
v Moore
[2015] NSWSC 180
Supreme Court of New South Wales
Wilson J
Pleadings - plaintiff filed statement of
claim seeking declaration asserted debt amounted to charge on real property
owned by defendant, pending repayment of claimed amount - defendant sought to
have claim struck out as disclosing no reasonable cause of action and having
tendency to cause embarrassment - held: statement of claim failed to identify
reasonable cause of action - plaintiff had pleaded a conclusion of law, not
material facts from which conclusion drawn - there was at least some basis that
plaintiff had triable case - statement of claim struck out with leave to file
and serve further statement of claim.
Mitchell
|
Idameneo
(No 123) Pty Ltd v Suszko
[2015] SASC 29
Supreme Court of South Australia
Stanley J
Pleadings - dispute arising out of sale
deed and practitioner contract entered between plaintiff company and defendant
medical practitioner - defendant sought to file and serve amended defence,
set-off and counterclaim - substantial delay - watered costs - failure of
defendant to explain reasons for delay - held: Court satisfied that, if
amendment permitted, trial would have to be adjourned -
adjournment would result in significant costs being incurred - adjournment would
prejudice plaintiff and have repercussions for other litigants - application
refused.
Idameneo (No 123) Pty Ltd
|
