Grapple Pay Pty Ltd v Conroy [2025] NSWSC 64

Grapple Pay Pty Ltd v Conroy [2025] NSWSC 64

The transfer of the Property to Ms Conroy was not made with intent to defraud creditors within the meaning of s 37A of the Conveyancing Act 1919 (NSW) because the payments she made constituted valuable consideration and the transfer did not reserve a benefit for Mr Conroy, nor go beyond preferring one creditor over another. The payment closely approximated the market value, and Ms Lucas was a genuine creditor or equitable owner. Therefore, Grapple failed to establish the requisite fraudulent intent. Ms Conroy did not become trustee of the Trust by way of the disputed addendums, and any relief in respect of the Trust property must fail given its lack of assets.

Parties
Plaintiff: Grapple Pay Pty Ltd; First Defendant: Ingrid Doris Conroy in her own right and in her capacity as trustee of The Bungabbee First Light Trust; Second Defendant: Manuel Hanna as the Trustee of the Bankrupt Estate of Jarrod Arthur Conroy
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 February 2025
Procedural Posture
Equity / Final Judgment
Outcome
Plaintiff's claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Conveyancing – Section 37 a of the Conveyancing Act 1919 (nsw) – Alienation of Property – Intention to Defraud Creditors, Trusts and Trustees – Trust Instruments – Amendment
Real Property Equity Conveyancing – Section 37 a of the Conveyancing Act 1919 (nsw) – Alienation of Property – Intention to Defraud Creditors Trusts and Trustees – Trust Instruments – Amendment

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 6 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 9
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Grapple Pay Pty Ltd

Plaintiff

Ingrid Doris Conroy in her own right and in her capacity as trustee of The Bungabbee First Light Trust

First Defendant

Manuel Hanna as the Trustee of the Bankrupt Estate of Jarrod Arthur Conroy

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Equity / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the transfer of the Property to Ms Conroy on 1 September 2022 was made by Mr Conroy with the intent to defraud creditors (s 37A(1) of the Conveyancing Act 1919 (NSW))
  2. 2 Whether Ms Conroy was a purchaser in good faith not having, at the time of the alienation, notice of any intent to defraud creditors (s 37A(3))
  3. 3 Whether Ms Conroy was appointed trustee pursuant to addendums to the trust instrument

Ratio Decidendi

The transfer of the Property to Ms Conroy was not made with intent to defraud creditors within the meaning of s 37A of the Conveyancing Act 1919 (NSW) because the payments she made constituted valuable consideration and the transfer did not reserve a benefit for Mr Conroy, nor go beyond preferring one creditor over another. The payment closely approximated the market value, and Ms Lucas was a genuine creditor or equitable owner. Therefore, Grapple failed to establish the requisite fraudulent intent. Ms Conroy did not become trustee of the Trust by way of the disputed addendums, and any relief in respect of the Trust property must fail given its lack of assets.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's claim dismissed

Orders

  • The Amended Summons be dismissed.
  • The First Defendant to serve/provide proposed costs order and submissions by 28 February 2025, indicating any request for oral hearing on costs.