Ebbeck v Neridovsky [2005] NSWSC 780

Ebbeck v Neridovsky [2005] NSWSC 780

Both sides engaged in conduct proscribed by clause 17 of the Deed. The Plaintiffs breached clause 17 by allowing the sign outside their property and by advertisements in The Bulls of the Breed 2002 and Poll Hereford Annual 2002. The Defendants breached clause 17 by maintaining advertising signs at Apsley Downs bearing the word "Doonbiddie" after the Deed. Accordingly, accepting the procedure adopted by the parties, each side was entitled to judgment against the other in the sum of $250,000.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
02 August 2005
Procedural Posture
Notices of Motion Concerning Enforcement of Deed and Entry of Judgment / Hearing of Notices of Motion After Prior Order for Specific Performance
Outcome
Judgment entered for the Defendants against the Plaintiffs for $250,000 and for the Plaintiffs against the Defendants for $250,000; costs stood over for argument.
Legal Topics
['specific Performance of Deed' 'breach of Deed' 'business Name' 'commercial or Marketing Strategy' 'stay of Execution']
['contract' 'equity'] ['specific Performance of Deed' 'breach of Deed' 'business Name' 'commercial or Marketing Strategy' 'stay of Execution']

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

Notices of Motion Concerning Enforcement of Deed and Entry of Judgment / Hearing of Notices of Motion After Prior Order for Specific Performance

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Plaintiffs engaged in a commercial or marketing strategy or other transaction using the name or prefix Doonbiddie, Doonbiddie Genetics, Doonbiddie Poll Herefords or Doonbiddie Poll Hereford Stud in breach of clause 17 of the Deed.' 'Whether the Defendants engaged in a commercial or marketing strategy or other transaction using the name or prefix Doonbiddie, Doonbiddie Genetics, Doonbiddie Poll Herefords or Doonbiddie Poll Hereford Stud in breach of clause 17 of the Deed.' 'Whether the stay of enforcement contemplated by clause 17 should cease and judgment be entered for each party in the sum of $250,000.']

Ratio Decidendi

Both sides engaged in conduct proscribed by clause 17 of the Deed. The Plaintiffs breached clause 17 by allowing the sign outside their property and by advertisements in The Bulls of the Breed 2002 and Poll Hereford Annual 2002. The Defendants breached clause 17 by maintaining advertising signs at Apsley Downs bearing the word "Doonbiddie" after the Deed. Accordingly, accepting the procedure adopted by the parties, each side was entitled to judgment against the other in the sum of $250,000.

Court Disposition

Judgment entered for the Defendants against the Plaintiffs for $250,000 and for the Plaintiffs against the Defendants for $250,000; costs stood over for argument.

Orders

  • ['I order that there be judgment for the Defendants against the Plaintiffs in the sum of $250,000.' 'I order that there be judgment for the Plaintiffs against the Defendants in the sum of $250,000.' 'I stand the matter over to a date to be fixed by arrangement with my Associate for argument as to costs.']