Nanevski Developments Pty Ltd v Slaveski; Mega-Top Cargo Pty Ltd v Nanevski Developments Pty Ltd [2022] NSWSC 1066
An enforceable partnership existed between Nanevski Developments Pty Ltd and Ken Slaveski (and, for these purposes, the other relevant Slaveski parties) from about February 2015 for the purchase and development of two properties, operated on a 50/50 basis as to cost, contribution, liabilities and profits. Registered legal interests by any party were held on trust for the partnership. There was no condition precedent (such as equalisation of contributions) to the creation of the partnership. The partnership must now be wound up, a receiver appointed, and a full account conducted of parties' contributions, entitlements, and partnership liabilities. Claims for conversion, trespass, debt by...
- Parties
- Plaintiff/second Cross Defendant (2019/153341); Defendant (2019/95876): Nanevski Developments Pty Ltd; First Defendant/first Cross Claimant (2019/153341): Ken Slaveski; Second Defendant/second Cross Claimant (2019/153341): Biljana Slaveski; Third Defendant/third Cross Claimant (2019/153341): James Slaveski; Fourth Defendant/fourth Cross Claimant (2019/153341); Plaintiff (2019/95876): Mega-Top Cargo Pty Ltd; First Cross Defendant (2019/153341): Tom Nanevski
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 09 August 2022
- Procedural Posture
- Equity / Principal Judgment After Final Hearing
- Outcome
- Partnership declared and receiver to be appointed to wind up partnership and conduct an accounting between the partners. Claims for conversion, trespass, Local Court debts, and misleading conduct all dismissed or absorbed into the partnership account.
- Legal Topics
- Existence of Partnership, Winding Up of Partnership, Partnership Account, Constructive Trusts, Joint Venture Arrangements, Conversion, Quantum Meruit, Misleading or Deceptive Conduct
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Nanevski Developments Pty Ltd
Plaintiff/second Cross Defendant (2019/153341); Defendant (2019/95876)
Ken Slaveski
First Defendant/first Cross Claimant (2019/153341)
Biljana Slaveski
Second Defendant/second Cross Claimant (2019/153341)
James Slaveski
Third Defendant/third Cross Claimant (2019/153341)
Mega-Top Cargo Pty Ltd
Fourth Defendant/fourth Cross Claimant (2019/153341); Plaintiff (2019/95876)
Tom Nanevski
First Cross Defendant (2019/153341)
Procedural Posture
Equity / Principal Judgment After Final Hearing
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether a partnership existed between Nanevski Developments and Ken Slaveski (and others) for the development of certain properties
- 2 Character and incidents of any such partnership
- 3 Entitlement to accounting between the parties
Ratio Decidendi
An enforceable partnership existed between Nanevski Developments Pty Ltd and Ken Slaveski (and, for these purposes, the other relevant Slaveski parties) from about February 2015 for the purchase and development of two properties, operated on a 50/50 basis as to cost, contribution, liabilities and profits. Registered legal interests by any party were held on trust for the partnership. There was no condition precedent (such as equalisation of contributions) to the creation of the partnership. The partnership must now be wound up, a receiver appointed, and a full account conducted of parties' contributions, entitlements, and partnership liabilities. Claims for conversion, trespass, debt by...
Court Disposition
Partnership declared and receiver to be appointed to wind up partnership and conduct an accounting between the partners. Claims for conversion, trespass, Local Court debts, and misleading conduct all dismissed or absorbed into the partnership account.
Orders
- Declaration that a partnership existed and subsists between Nanevski Developments Pty Ltd and Ken Slaveski for the purchase and development of Riverside and Vista Street properties.
- Ken Slaveski, James Slaveski and Biljana Slaveski hold their legal interests in the properties on trust for the partnership.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment