Petersen v Moloney [1951] HCA 57

Petersen v Moloney [1951] HCA 57

There was no evidence Pulbrook had actual or implied authority to receive the purchase money on behalf of the plaintiff; nor was there evidence of ratification or estoppel. The acknowledgment in the transfer form did not create estoppel. The judgment against Pulbrook did not amount to a final election, precluding...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Appellant; Plaintiff: Petersen; Respondent; Defendant: Moloney; Respondent; Defendant: Pulbrook
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
16 October 1951
Procedural Posture
Appeal / High Court of Australia on Appeal From Supreme Court of Western Australia
Outcome
Appeal allowed with costs.
Legal Topics
Authority of Estate Agent to Receive Purchase Money, Implied Authority, Ratification, Estoppel, Election Between Alternative Defendants
Agency Law Property Law Contract Law Authority of Estate Agent to Receive Purchase Money Implied Authority Ratification Estoppel Election Between Alternative Defendants

Source-derived case record

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 4 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Petersen

Appellant; Plaintiff

Moloney

Respondent; Defendant

Pulbrook

Respondent; Defendant

Procedural Posture

Appeal / High Court of Australia on Appeal From Supreme Court of Western Australia

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether estate agent has implied or express authority to receive purchase money on behalf of vendor
  2. 2 Whether vendor ratified estate agent's receipt of purchase money
  3. 3 Whether acknowledgment in statutory transfer creates estoppel against the vendor

Ratio Decidendi

There was no evidence Pulbrook had actual or implied authority to receive the purchase money on behalf of the plaintiff; nor was there evidence of ratification or estoppel. The acknowledgment in the transfer form did not create estoppel. The judgment against Pulbrook did not amount to a final election, precluding relief against Moloney. Judgment should be for the plaintiff against Moloney for the purchase money.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed with costs.

Orders

  • Judgment of Walker J. set aside.
  • Plaintiff to recover from defendant Moloney the sum of £700 with costs.