Sihaphone & Anor v Baccam & Anor [2021] NSWDC 558

Sihaphone & Anor v Baccam & Anor [2021] NSWDC 558

The Court found the second defendant was not a party to either loan agreement; the first defendant entered into both loan agreements and received $20,000 in April 2018 and $46,500 in January 2019. The $20,000 loan was not repaid. The $46,500 loan was advanced as a lump sum in January 2019 and only $1,800 was repaid, leaving $44,700 outstanding. Interest on both loans was awarded as claimed. Judgment was given for the plaintiffs against the first defendant, and for the second defendant against the plaintiffs.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 October 2021
Procedural Posture
Civil / Principal Judgment
Outcome
Judgment for the plaintiffs against the first defendant; judgment for the second defendant against the plaintiffs
Legal Topics
['money Claims' 'loan Agreements' 'repayment' 'interest']
['contracts'] ['money Claims' 'loan Agreements' 'repayment' 'interest']

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

Civil / Principal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the second defendant was a party to the loan agreements of 11 April 2018 and 17 January 2019' 'Whether the first defendant repaid the $20,000 loan' 'Whether there was an agreement to lend $46,500 and whether this amount was advanced' 'Whether repayments of $1,800 were referable to the second loan agreement' 'Entitlement to interest and calculation of judgment sums']

Ratio Decidendi

The Court found the second defendant was not a party to either loan agreement; the first defendant entered into both loan agreements and received $20,000 in April 2018 and $46,500 in January 2019. The $20,000 loan was not repaid. The $46,500 loan was advanced as a lump sum in January 2019 and only $1,800 was repaid, leaving $44,700 outstanding. Interest on both loans was awarded as claimed. Judgment was given for the plaintiffs against the first defendant, and for the second defendant against the plaintiffs.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the plaintiffs against the first defendant; judgment for the second defendant against the plaintiffs

Orders

  • ['Judgment for the plaintiffs against the first defendant for the sum of $153,162.16, with costs as agreed or assessed' 'Judgment for the second defendant against the plaintiffs, with costs as agreed or assessed' "Liberty to apply (in relation to interest calculations) on 7 days' notice" 'Applications for variation...