Maio v Sacco (No. 2) [2009] NSWSC 742

Maio v Sacco (No. 2) [2009] NSWSC 742

The plaintiff's right to equitable accounting arose in the sale proceedings, not when expenditure was made, but equity's inherent jurisdiction permitted an interest award to do justice. Because the defendant had not wrongfully had use of the plaintiff's money and both parties benefited from the property's increased capital value, interest was limited to compensation for inflation, producing $5,444 on the $13,737 contribution. For costs, the defendant substantially succeeded because he accepted reasonable contribution in principle and the litigation was caused and lengthened by the plaintiff's exaggerated and dishonest claims; the plaintiff was therefore ordered to pay the defendant's...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
31 July 2009
Procedural Posture
Equity Proceedings Concerning Sale of Co Owned Property and Equitable Contribution / Determination of Interest, Costs and Sale Orders Following Earlier Judgment
Outcome
Orders made for sale of the property, payment of $38,362 to the plaintiff from sale proceeds before equal division of the balance, plaintiff to pay the defendant's costs with interest, and entry of orders delayed for seven days to permit submissions on CPI material and calculations.
Legal Topics
['equitable Contribution' 'interest' 'inherent Equitable Jurisdiction' 'costs Discretion' 'sale of Property']
['equity' 'civil Procedure' 'costs'] ['equitable Contribution' 'interest' 'inherent Equitable Jurisdiction' 'costs Discretion' 'sale of Property']

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

Equity Proceedings Concerning Sale of Co Owned Property and Equitable Contribution / Determination of Interest, Costs and Sale Orders Following Earlier Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether interest should be awarded on the plaintiff's equitable contribution claim under s 100 of the Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW) or equity's inherent jurisdiction." 'What rate or amount of interest should be awarded to compensate for loss of value of money.' 'Which party should be treated as successful for costs purposes.' "Whether the defendant's costs should be ordered on an indemnity basis." 'Whether interest should be payable on costs under s 101 of the Civil Procedure Act.']

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff's right to equitable accounting arose in the sale proceedings, not when expenditure was made, but equity's inherent jurisdiction permitted an interest award to do justice. Because the defendant had not wrongfully had use of the plaintiff's money and both parties benefited from the property's increased capital value, interest was limited to compensation for inflation, producing $5,444 on the $13,737 contribution. For costs, the defendant substantially succeeded because he accepted reasonable contribution in principle and the litigation was caused and lengthened by the plaintiff's exaggerated and dishonest claims; the plaintiff was therefore ordered to pay the defendant's...

Court Disposition

Orders made for sale of the property, payment of $38,362 to the plaintiff from sale proceeds before equal division of the balance, plaintiff to pay the defendant's costs with interest, and entry of orders delayed for seven days to permit submissions on CPI material and calculations.

Orders

  • ['The plaintiff and the defendant shall forthwith do all things and sign all documents necessary to list the property at 39A Tristram Road, Beacon Hill for sale and sell the property.' 'If the property is not sold at auction or within seven days after auction by negotiation with the highest bidder, the parties shall...