OLIVERI v JONES & ORS [1999] NSWSC 796

OLIVERI v JONES & ORS [1999] NSWSC 796

Mr Jones was not entitled to mesne profits as he never took possession or issued proceedings in ejectment prior to seeking damages. The Master's approach to the accounts, particularly allowances for mortgage repayments, was correct. Costs were ordered against the cross-defendants due to their conduct, but limited in accordance with the Court’s view of proportionality.

Parties
Cross Defendant: Giovanni Oliveri; Cross Defendant: Emanueli Oliveri; Cross Claimant: Michael G. Jones
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 August 1999
Procedural Posture
Appeal From Master in Accounts Proceedings / Judgment After Hearing Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs; costs of the inquiry and related application ordered as specified.
Legal Topics
Accounts, Mesne Profits, Appeal From Master, Trustee Powers, Damages for Occupation
Equity Property Law Accounts Mesne Profits Appeal From Master Trustee Powers Damages for Occupation

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Giovanni Oliveri

Cross Defendant

Emanueli Oliveri

Cross Defendant

Michael G. Jones

Cross Claimant

Procedural Posture

Appeal From Master in Accounts Proceedings / Judgment After Hearing Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the cross-claimant (trustee) is entitled to damages for mesne profits relating to occupation of property by cross-defendant after sequestration order
  2. 2 Whether allowances for mortgage repayments in the account should be reduced due to occupation of one unit by cross-defendant
  3. 3 Entitlement to costs for inquiry into accounts

Ratio Decidendi

Mr Jones was not entitled to mesne profits as he never took possession or issued proceedings in ejectment prior to seeking damages. The Master's approach to the accounts, particularly allowances for mortgage repayments, was correct. Costs were ordered against the cross-defendants due to their conduct, but limited in accordance with the Court’s view of proportionality.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs; costs of the inquiry and related application ordered as specified.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs.
  • Cross-defendants to pay cross-claimant's costs of the Inquiry, assessed to exclude costs after 1 December 1998 and costs of senior counsel.