GOMES v GUERREIRO [1991] NSWCA 125

GOMES v GUERREIRO [1991] NSWCA 125

The trial judge's findings that Mr A. Guerreiro and the plaintiff were the true purchasers of the Botany Road premises, and that any monies contributed by the defendants were loans rather than investment for equity, were supported by the evidence. The defendants acquiesced in the use of their names and did not actively exercise ownership. No reason was shown to disturb the trial judge's factual conclusions; the appeal must therefore fail.

Parties
Appellant: Gomes; Respondent: Guerreiro
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
10 April 1991
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
appeal dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Trusts, Fiduciary Duty, Property Ownership, Credibility Findings
Equity Trusts Fiduciary Duty Property Ownership Credibility Findings

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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Gomes

Appellant

Guerreiro

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Botany Road premises held in the parents' names were held on trust for the deceased son and his estate
  2. 2 Whether factual findings of the trial judge regarding the source of purchase monies and intentions should be disturbed
  3. 3 Whether the defendants could claim an equitable interest based on money lent or mortgage borrowing

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge's findings that Mr A. Guerreiro and the plaintiff were the true purchasers of the Botany Road premises, and that any monies contributed by the defendants were loans rather than investment for equity, were supported by the evidence. The defendants acquiesced in the use of their names and did not actively exercise ownership. No reason was shown to disturb the trial judge's factual conclusions; the appeal must therefore fail.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed with costs

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs.