IVAN CHARLES PRICE & 1 ORS V H.P. MERCANTILE PTY LIMITED [2007] NSWSC 632

IVAN CHARLES PRICE & 1 ORS V H.P. MERCANTILE PTY LIMITED [2007] NSWSC 632

The harvesting and marketing costs were payable under the Farming Agreements once the services were performed, without any certificate, invoice or demand being a condition precedent. Those debts and the liability to pay contractual interest at 20% per annum had accrued before the Third Assignment. The Third Assignment validly assigned Treetop's legal interest in the debts to Mercantile under s 12 of the Conveyancing Act 1919, enabling Mercantile to sue to recover the liquidated debts without joining Treetop. The appeal therefore failed on liability. However, because contractual interest formed part of the judgment debt, s 100(3)(b) of the Civil Procedure Act 2005 prohibited an award of...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
21 June 2007
Procedural Posture
Appeal From Local Court Judgment on a Liquidated Claim, With Cross Summons Concerning Contractual Interest / Supreme Court Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed subject to setting aside statutory interest; cross claim granted as to contractual interest; appellants/cross defendants ordered to pay costs.
Legal Topics
['equitable and Legal Assignments' 'debtor and Creditor' 'contractual Interest' 'statutory Interest' 'construction of Farming Agreements']
['contract Law' 'civil Procedure' 'equity'] ['equitable and Legal Assignments' 'debtor and Creditor' 'contractual Interest' 'statutory Interest' 'construction of Farming Agreements']

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

Appeal From Local Court Judgment on a Liquidated Claim, With Cross Summons Concerning Contractual Interest / Supreme Court Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether there was a pre-existing or crystallised debt for harvesting and marketing costs capable of assignment.' 'Whether the requirements of s 12 of the Conveyancing Act 1919 were complied with so as to effect a valid legal assignment.' 'Whether the Third Assignment assigned only a debt or also permitted Mercantile to sue to recover it.' 'Whether the appellants were liable for contractual interest under clauses 19.7 and 20.7 of the Farming Agreements.' 'Whether statutory interest under s 100 of the Civil Procedure Act 2005 could be awarded where the judgment debt included contractual interest.']

Ratio Decidendi

The harvesting and marketing costs were payable under the Farming Agreements once the services were performed, without any certificate, invoice or demand being a condition precedent. Those debts and the liability to pay contractual interest at 20% per annum had accrued before the Third Assignment. The Third Assignment validly assigned Treetop's legal interest in the debts to Mercantile under s 12 of the Conveyancing Act 1919, enabling Mercantile to sue to recover the liquidated debts without joining Treetop. The appeal therefore failed on liability. However, because contractual interest formed part of the judgment debt, s 100(3)(b) of the Civil Procedure Act 2005 prohibited an award of...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed subject to setting aside statutory interest; cross claim granted as to contractual interest; appellants/cross defendants ordered to pay costs.

Orders

  • ["The appeal is dismissed, subject only to setting aside that part of the Magistrate's order dated 12 May 2006 that awards interest in favour of the respondent pursuant to s 100 of the Civil Procedure Act." "The orders sought in paragraph 2 of the cross claim are granted and in lieu of the order made by the...