Blomley v Ryan [1956] HCA 81

Blomley v Ryan [1956] HCA 81

A contract for the sale of land may be set aside in equity where, at the time of contracting, the vendor is at a special disadvantage—here, severe intoxication, advanced age, and lack of advice—known to and exploited by the purchaser or their agents, and resulting in a transaction substantially unfair to the vendor. Such circumstances make it unconscionable to enforce or allow benefit under the contract, regardless of the vendor's legal capacity. The High Court found these requirements satisfied on the facts, affirming the trial judge's order of rescission and refusal of specific performance.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / High Court Appeal on Specific Performance and Rescission
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['unconscionable Conduct' 'specific Performance' 'capacity to Contract' 'constructive Fraud' 'relief Against Contracts' 'discretionary Equitable Remedies']
['equity' 'contract Law'] ['unconscionable Conduct' 'specific Performance' 'capacity to Contract' 'constructive Fraud' 'relief Against Contracts' 'discretionary Equitable Remedies']

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 / High Court Appeal on Specific Performance and Rescission

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the contract for sale of land should be specifically enforced or set aside for unconscionable conduct' 'Whether the respondent was at a special disadvantage due to mental and physical weakness, intoxication, lack of advice, and whether the appellant took unconscientious advantage of this' 'Whether amendments to pleadings to allow a counterclaim for rescission were permissible so late in the trial']

Ratio Decidendi

A contract for the sale of land may be set aside in equity where, at the time of contracting, the vendor is at a special disadvantage—here, severe intoxication, advanced age, and lack of advice—known to and exploited by the purchaser or their agents, and resulting in a transaction substantially unfair to the vendor. Such circumstances make it unconscionable to enforce or allow benefit under the contract, regardless of the vendor's legal capacity. The High Court found these requirements satisfied on the facts, affirming the trial judge's order of rescission and refusal of specific performance.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ['Appeal dismissed with costs.' "Contract for sale of 'Worrah' set aside (rescission granted) as unconscionable." 'Respondent entitled to decree for rescission; no specific performance or damages awarded to the appellant.']