Huseyin Aksu v Mukadder Ilhan & Ors [2011] NSWSC 970

Huseyin Aksu v Mukadder Ilhan & Ors [2011] NSWSC 970

The plaintiff failed to prove to the court's reasonable satisfaction that any agreement was made in September 1993, or at any other time, between him and the defendants under which he agreed to lend them $120,000. The plaintiff relied on untested recollections of spoken words recorded many years later and without contemporaneous documentation, while the defendants' and Mary's evidence was substantially consistent, plausible and left substantially intact; the use of funds in the shop and payments into the plaintiff's bank account did not prove the alleged agreement.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
30 August 2011
Procedural Posture
Contract Claim for Payment Under Alleged Oral Loan Agreement / Principal Judgment After Hearing
Outcome
Amended statement of claim dismissed; plaintiff to pay the defendants' costs.
Legal Topics
['oral Agreement' 'loan Agreement' 'burden of Proof' 'civil Standard of Proof' 'witness Evidence']
['contract'] ['oral Agreement' 'loan Agreement' 'burden of Proof' 'civil Standard of Proof' 'witness Evidence']

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

Contract Claim for Payment Under Alleged Oral Loan Agreement / Principal Judgment After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the plaintiff proved to the court's reasonable satisfaction that a binding oral agreement was made in September 1993 between the plaintiff as lender and the defendants as borrowers for a loan of $120,000 for 12 months." 'Whether Mary acted as agent for the defendants in arranging the alleged loan.']

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff failed to prove to the court's reasonable satisfaction that any agreement was made in September 1993, or at any other time, between him and the defendants under which he agreed to lend them $120,000. The plaintiff relied on untested recollections of spoken words recorded many years later and without contemporaneous documentation, while the defendants' and Mary's evidence was substantially consistent, plausible and left substantially intact; the use of funds in the shop and payments into the plaintiff's bank account did not prove the alleged agreement.

Court Disposition

Amended statement of claim dismissed; plaintiff to pay the defendants' costs.

Orders

  • ['The amended statement of claim be dismissed.' "The plaintiff pay the defendants' costs."]