Bray v Bray [1926] HCA 40
Where, in a suit for partition, partition is not sought or is impracticable, and a party with a moiety interest requests sale, the court should grant a sale unless good reason is shown to the contrary; and discretion as to costs is properly exercised against a defendant who unsuccessfully raises factual issues against a sale.
- Parties
- Plaintiff: John Bray; Defendant: James Bray; Defendant: Permanent Trustee Co. of New South Wales
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 08 November 1926
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal / On Appeal From the Supreme Court of New South Wales
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed with costs
- Legal Topics
- Partition, Sale of Co Owned Land, Costs Discretion
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
John Bray
Plaintiff
James Bray
Defendant
Permanent Trustee Co. of New South Wales
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Appeal / On Appeal From the Supreme Court of New South Wales
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether a tenant in common is entitled to an order for sale under s 4(1)(b) of the Partition Act 1900 (NSW) where the other co-owner opposes but does not seek partition
- 2 Whether the defendant should be ordered to pay the plaintiff’s additional costs arising from factual issues raised by the defendant
Ratio Decidendi
Where, in a suit for partition, partition is not sought or is impracticable, and a party with a moiety interest requests sale, the court should grant a sale unless good reason is shown to the contrary; and discretion as to costs is properly exercised against a defendant who unsuccessfully raises factual issues against a sale.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed with costs
Orders
- Property to be sold out of Court
- Permanent Trustee Co. of New South Wales to have conduct of sale
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment