Burns & Ors v AMP Finance Ltd [2004] NSWCA 469

Burns & Ors v AMP Finance Ltd [2004] NSWCA 469

The Court found that there was no breach of contract regarding release of the lots because there was an agreement, implied by conduct, that the lots would remain within security until needed, and no evidence of loss was established. The Court also rejected that the lender breached an implied term to act in good faith regarding endorsement of the boundary adjustment plan, finding no sufficient evidence of bad faith or that consideration of the endorsement would necessarily have led to a different outcome. Damages were not available as no actual loss was proven.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
17 December 2004
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
['loan Agreement' 'mortgage Security' 'release of Security' 'good Faith' 'breach of Contract' 'damages' 'subdivision' 'boundary Adjustment']
['contract Law' 'banking and Finance Law'] ['loan Agreement' 'mortgage Security' 'release of Security' 'good Faith' 'breach of Contract' 'damages' 'subdivision' 'boundary Adjustment']

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 Appeal / Court of Appeal Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether AMP Finance Ltd breached the loan agreement by not releasing lots from its security when requested' 'Whether AMP Finance Ltd breached an implied obligation to act in good faith in relation to endorsement of a boundary adjustment plan' 'Whether damages for breach of contract were to be tried separately without proof of actual loss']

Ratio Decidendi

The Court found that there was no breach of contract regarding release of the lots because there was an agreement, implied by conduct, that the lots would remain within security until needed, and no evidence of loss was established. The Court also rejected that the lender breached an implied term to act in good faith regarding endorsement of the boundary adjustment plan, finding no sufficient evidence of bad faith or that consideration of the endorsement would necessarily have led to a different outcome. Damages were not available as no actual loss was proven.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs

Orders

  • ['Appeal dismissed with costs']