Turner v Turner [1918] HCA 66

Turner v Turner [1918] HCA 66

There was no evidence to support the jury's finding that either the family settlement or the compromise agreement had been made. Further, the Statute of Frauds applied in the absence of part performance or written agreement, and the agreements failed for lack of authority and ratification.

Parties
Appellants; Plaintiffs: Turner and others; Respondent; Defendant: Turner
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
17 October 1918
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Appeal From the Supreme Court of Western Australia
Outcome
appeal dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Family Settlement, Services in Working Farm, Compromise of Action, Evidence, Statute of Frauds
Contract Law Family Settlement Services in Working Farm Compromise of Action Evidence Statute of Frauds

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Turner and others

Appellants; Plaintiffs

Turner

Respondent; Defendant

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Appeal From the Supreme Court of Western Australia

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there was evidence to support the existence of an agreement for family settlement in consideration of services.
  2. 2 Whether evidence supported an alleged compromise agreement.
  3. 3 Whether the Statute of Frauds precluded enforcement of the agreements.

Ratio Decidendi

There was no evidence to support the jury's finding that either the family settlement or the compromise agreement had been made. Further, the Statute of Frauds applied in the absence of part performance or written agreement, and the agreements failed for lack of authority and ratification.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed with costs

Orders

  • appeal dismissed with costs