Joudo v Joudo [2024] NSWSC 232

Joudo v Joudo [2024] NSWSC 232

The Court rejected the alleged oral rental agreement because it was unsupported by contemporaneous documents, inconsistent with the parties' objective conduct and inherent probabilities, and dependent on evidence the Court did not accept. The Court accepted that Ravina, Ronnie and Marie acted under a joint endeavour in which Ravina acquired and financed the Property while Ronnie and Marie completed and improved it, maintained it and contributed to mortgage payments. The joint endeavour failed without attributable blame by 15 April 2021, and it would be unconscionable for Ravina to retain all sale proceeds; the parties' contributions were to be accounted for, with an occupation rent...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
12 March 2024
Procedural Posture
Equity Proceedings Concerning Alleged Oral Rental Agreement and Cross Claim for Failed Joint Endeavour Constructive Trust / Principal Judgment After Hearing, With Proceedings Adjourned for Occupation Rent, Final Orders and Costs
Outcome
Ravina's rental claim was rejected and Ronnie and Marie's failed joint endeavour constructive trust claim was upheld in principle; the proceedings were adjourned for the parties to agree occupation rent, final orders and costs.
Legal Topics
['alleged Oral Lease' 'failed Joint Endeavour' 'constructive Trust' 'division of Proceeds of Sale' 'occupation Rent' 'credibility and Fact Finding']
['equity' 'property Law' 'trusts' 'residential Tenancies'] ['alleged Oral Lease' 'failed Joint Endeavour' 'constructive Trust' 'division of Proceeds of Sale' 'occupation Rent' 'credibility and Fact Finding']

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 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Equity Proceedings Concerning Alleged Oral Rental Agreement and Cross Claim for Failed Joint Endeavour Constructive Trust / Principal Judgment After Hearing, With Proceedings Adjourned for Occupation Rent, Final Orders and Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether there was an oral tenancy agreement under which Marie Joudo agreed to pay Ravina Joudo $600 per week to occupy the Property.' 'If there was no oral tenancy agreement, whether the parties instead entered into and acted upon a joint endeavour concerning the purchase, construction and occupation of the Property.' "Whether the joint endeavour failed without attributable blame and, if so, how the sale proceeds and parties' contributions should be accounted for." 'What occupation rent should be paid by the cross-claimants after the failure of the joint endeavour.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Court rejected the alleged oral rental agreement because it was unsupported by contemporaneous documents, inconsistent with the parties' objective conduct and inherent probabilities, and dependent on evidence the Court did not accept. The Court accepted that Ravina, Ronnie and Marie acted under a joint endeavour in which Ravina acquired and financed the Property while Ronnie and Marie completed and improved it, maintained it and contributed to mortgage payments. The joint endeavour failed without attributable blame by 15 April 2021, and it would be unconscionable for Ravina to retain all sale proceeds; the parties' contributions were to be accounted for, with an occupation rent...

Court Disposition

Ravina's rental claim was rejected and Ronnie and Marie's failed joint endeavour constructive trust claim was upheld in principle; the proceedings were adjourned for the parties to agree occupation rent, final orders and costs.

Orders

  • ['Adjourn the proceedings to 9.30 am on 26 March 2024 or such other time as may be arranged with my Associate.' 'Direct the parties to confer and to seek to agree on the occupation rent to be paid by the cross-claimants and orders otherwise to give effect to this judgment and to deal with costs.' 'No later than 24...