Hanna v Raoul [2018] NSWCA 201

Hanna v Raoul [2018] NSWCA 201

Although the primary judge erred in finding that Mr Raoul lacked capacity because he understood the broad operation or general purport of transferring the property subject to a life estate in return for discharge of the mortgage, the appeal failed because Mr Raoul was in a position of special disadvantage and Mr Hanna took unconscientious advantage of that position by entering into and seeking to retain the benefit of a transaction at a substantial undervalue. The legal advice given did not make the transaction fair, just and reasonable because it did not address the practical consequences, alternatives, future need for capital or the need for independent financial advice. For...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
13 September 2018
Procedural Posture
Appeal From Supreme Court of New South Wales, Equity Division / Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['capacity to Contract' 'unconscionable Dealing' 'unjust Contracts' 'life Estate and Remainder Interest' 'contracts Review Act 1980 (nsw)' 'calderbank Offer and Indemnity Costs']
['contract Law' 'equity' 'property Law' 'costs'] ['capacity to Contract' 'unconscionable Dealing' 'unjust Contracts' 'life Estate and Remainder Interest' 'contracts Review Act 1980 (nsw)' 'calderbank Offer and Indemnity Costs']

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

Appeal From Supreme Court of New South Wales, Equity Division / Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether Mr Raoul had capacity to enter into the Deed and the Transfer on 16 September 2014.' 'Whether the Deed and the Transfer should be set aside on the basis that they were unconscionable.' 'Whether the Deed and the Transfer were unjust at law or within the meaning of the Contracts Review Act 1980 (NSW).' 'Whether the primary judge erred in awarding costs, including indemnity costs after rejection of a Calderbank offer.']

Ratio Decidendi

Although the primary judge erred in finding that Mr Raoul lacked capacity because he understood the broad operation or general purport of transferring the property subject to a life estate in return for discharge of the mortgage, the appeal failed because Mr Raoul was in a position of special disadvantage and Mr Hanna took unconscientious advantage of that position by entering into and seeking to retain the benefit of a transaction at a substantial undervalue. The legal advice given did not make the transaction fair, just and reasonable because it did not address the practical consequences, alternatives, future need for capital or the need for independent financial advice. For...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ['Appeal dismissed with costs.']