GARCIA v LAM and ANOR [1996] NSWCA 204

GARCIA v LAM and ANOR [1996] NSWCA 204

The intended gift reflected in the Deed of Assignment related to the legal title to some units or an interest therein, but the first respondent was not the owner at the relevant time and had not done all necessary to effect a transfer; equity will not enforce an imperfect voluntary assignment; thus the appellant’s claim must fail.

Parties
Appellant: Garcia; First Respondent: Lam; Second Respondent: Elizabeth Bay Properties Pty Ltd
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
02 July 1996
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Interlocutory Judgment Appealed Against in Supreme Court of NSW Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
Imperfect Gifts, Assignment of Choses in Action, Voluntary Assignment, Interlocutory Proceedings, Caveats
Equity Property Law Imperfect Gifts Assignment of Choses in Action Voluntary Assignment Interlocutory Proceedings Caveats

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 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Garcia

Appellant

Lam

First Respondent

Elizabeth Bay Properties Pty Ltd

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Interlocutory Judgment Appealed Against in Supreme Court of NSW Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Deed of Assignment constituted a present assignment enforceable by the appellant
  2. 2 Whether the intended gift in the Deed of Assignment was enforceable in equity
  3. 3 Whether the appellant had a sufficient interest in the property to sustain the caveat

Ratio Decidendi

The intended gift reflected in the Deed of Assignment related to the legal title to some units or an interest therein, but the first respondent was not the owner at the relevant time and had not done all necessary to effect a transfer; equity will not enforce an imperfect voluntary assignment; thus the appellant’s claim must fail.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs