Heilpern v Anasco [2010] NSWSC 317

Heilpern v Anasco [2010] NSWSC 317

The defendant signed the contract in the agent's office on 8 July 2009 understanding that it was a contract for sale of her unit at $587,000, and then instructed her solicitor to proceed with the sale. She therefore did not establish non est factum. The contract was on standard sale of land terms, the price was appropriate, any limitations in the defendant's English did not prevent her understanding the transaction, and the plaintiff was not implicated in any alleged pressure by the defendant's own agent. The contract was not unjust under the Contracts Review Act, and, in any event, discretionary relief would have been refused because of the plaintiff's innocence, prejudice to her if...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 April 2010
Procedural Posture
Equity Proceeding for Specific Performance of a Contract for Sale of Land / Principal Judgment After Hearing
Outcome
Non est factum not established. The contract was not unjust. Decree for specific performance granted.
Legal Topics
['specific Performance' 'non Est Factum' 'unconscionable and Unjust Transactions' 'contracts Review Act Relief' 'sale of Land']
['equity' 'contract Law' 'property Law'] ['specific Performance' 'non Est Factum' 'unconscionable and Unjust Transactions' 'contracts Review Act Relief' 'sale of Land']

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

Equity Proceeding for Specific Performance of a Contract for Sale of Land / Principal Judgment After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the defendant established non est factum by showing that she signed the contract believing it to be radically different from its true nature and without carelessness on her part.' 'Whether the contract for sale was unjust under (NSW) Contracts Review Act 1980, s 7, having regard to substantive injustice, procedural injustice and discretionary considerations.' 'Whether specific performance of the contract for sale should be granted.']

Ratio Decidendi

The defendant signed the contract in the agent's office on 8 July 2009 understanding that it was a contract for sale of her unit at $587,000, and then instructed her solicitor to proceed with the sale. She therefore did not establish non est factum. The contract was on standard sale of land terms, the price was appropriate, any limitations in the defendant's English did not prevent her understanding the transaction, and the plaintiff was not implicated in any alleged pressure by the defendant's own agent. The contract was not unjust under the Contracts Review Act, and, in any event, discretionary relief would have been refused because of the plaintiff's innocence, prejudice to her if...

Court Disposition

Non est factum not established. The contract was not unjust. Decree for specific performance granted.

Orders

  • ['Declare that the contract dated 9 July 2009 between the defendant as vendor and the plaintiff as purchaser of Unit 9, 226 Rainbow Street, Coogee, being the land comprised in folio identifier 9/SP3752, ought to be specifically performed and carried into execution.' 'Order that the Contract be specifically performed...