Ramzy Sebie & Anor v Andy Duong Duc Pham & Ors (No. 6) [2018] NSWSC 592

Ramzy Sebie & Anor v Andy Duong Duc Pham & Ors (No. 6) [2018] NSWSC 592

The plaintiffs failed to establish a serious question to be tried as to any equitable or beneficial interest in the property sufficient to restrain settlement. Their case relied on documents previously found to be fictitious, was unconvincing and delayed, and was further tainted by Mr Ramzy Sebie’s misleading conduct. The balance of convenience, including hardship and prejudice to the defendants, weighed against the grant of interlocutory injunctive relief.

Parties
First Plaintiff: Ramzy Sebie; Second Plaintiff: Rose Sebie; First Defendant: Andy Duong Duc Pham; Second Defendant: Thi Huong Giang Pham; Third Defendant: Robert Sebie
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 May 2018
Procedural Posture
Application for Interlocutory Injunction / Interlocutory Application Dismissed
Outcome
Application for interlocutory injunction dismissed.
Legal Topics
Injunctions, Interlocutory Injunction, Trusts, Conveyancing, Sale of Land, Beneficial Interest, Breach of Trust, Notice of Breach, Serious Question to Be Tried, Balance of Convenience, Laches, Delay
Equity Injunctions Interlocutory Injunction Trusts Conveyancing Sale of Land Beneficial Interest Breach of Trust +5 more

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 4 Authorities cited 25 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ramzy Sebie

First Plaintiff

Rose Sebie

Second Plaintiff

Andy Duong Duc Pham

First Defendant

Thi Huong Giang Pham

Second Defendant

Robert Sebie

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Application for Interlocutory Injunction / Interlocutory Application Dismissed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether evidence supports inference that the purchaser has notice of any alleged breach of trust by the trustee
  2. 2 Whether there is a serious question to be tried regarding the plaintiffs' beneficial interest in the property
  3. 3 Strength of the plaintiffs' case for interlocutory relief

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiffs failed to establish a serious question to be tried as to any equitable or beneficial interest in the property sufficient to restrain settlement. Their case relied on documents previously found to be fictitious, was unconvincing and delayed, and was further tainted by Mr Ramzy Sebie’s misleading conduct. The balance of convenience, including hardship and prejudice to the defendants, weighed against the grant of interlocutory injunctive relief.

Court Disposition

Application for interlocutory injunction dismissed.

Orders

  • Leave is not granted to the first plaintiff to lodge any further caveats over the Chiswick property.
  • Plaintiffs' application for interlocutory injunction is dismissed.