THOMAS DAVIS V. EDWARD ALFRED BUNN 12/1941

THOMAS DAVIS V. EDWARD ALFRED BUNN 12/1941

A decision that Bunn took a one third share of the proceeds was not 'cardinal' to the decree in the prior suit, and thus does not operate as an estoppel; the demurrer should be allowed and evidence supporting the second replication is rejected.

Parties
Appellant (defendant): Thomas Davis; Respondent (plaintiff): Edward Alfred Bunn
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
30 July 1941
Procedural Posture
Appeal From Supreme Court of New South Wales in Its Equitable Jurisdiction / Judgment on Appeal From Order Overruling Demurrer to Second Replication
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Estoppel, Res Judicata, Demurrer, Lottery Proceedings, Interest in Prize Money
Equity Estoppel Res Judicata Demurrer Lottery Proceedings Interest in Prize Money

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

Parties

Thomas Davis

Appellant (defendant)

Edward Alfred Bunn

Respondent (plaintiff)

Procedural Posture

Appeal From Supreme Court of New South Wales in Its Equitable Jurisdiction / Judgment on Appeal From Order Overruling Demurrer to Second Replication

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the previous determination regarding interests in a lottery ticket operates as an estoppel in subsequent litigation between the parties
  2. 2 Whether the second replication, based on the prior suit record, is good in law

Ratio Decidendi

A decision that Bunn took a one third share of the proceeds was not 'cardinal' to the decree in the prior suit, and thus does not operate as an estoppel; the demurrer should be allowed and evidence supporting the second replication is rejected.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Order of Supreme Court dated 21 March 1941 (overruling demurrer and costs) discharged
  • Demurrer allowed