Obvious Deadline Pty Ltd v Clancy; Clancy v Obvious Deadline Pty Ltd [2016] NSWSC 1837

Prof Clancy is entitled to contribution from Trout Hall Pty Ltd for one-half of the portion of his $125,000 payment that was attributable to the outstanding debt (73% of $125,000), as only two solvent co-guarantors remained when the contribution was determined, and contribution cannot be claimed for any overpayment.

Jurisdiction: Australia
Judgment Date: 16 December 2016
Procedural Posture: Equity / Principal Judgment After Settlement of Primary Claim; Determination of Contribution Claim by Cross Claimant
Outcome: Guarantor entitled to contribution from co-guarantor of $46,625
Legal Topics: ['guarantees' 'contribution Between Co Guarantors' 'professional Negligence' 'insolvency']

['equity'] ['guarantees' 'contribution Between Co Guarantors' 'professional Negligence' 'insolvency']

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

Procedural Posture

Equity / Principal Judgment After Settlement of Primary Claim; Determination of Contribution Claim by Cross Claimant

Legal Issues

1 ['Whether Prof Clancy is entitled to contribution from co-guarantor Trout Hall Pty Ltd in respect of payment made under a guarantee' "What portion of Prof Clancy's payment is recoverable from Trout Hall given an overpayment to the lender" 'Whether the relevant time for assessing solvent co-guarantors is when proceedings commenced or when contribution determined']

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Guarantor entitled to contribution from co-guarantor of $46,625

Orders

['Trout Hall Pty Ltd to contribute $46,625 to Prof Clancy']