Sleboda v Sleboda [2008] NSWCA 122

Sleboda v Sleboda [2008] NSWCA 122

The appeal was dismissed because the Court of Appeal was not persuaded that the trial judge was wrong to reject Mr Lee's evidence as reconstruction rather than independent recollection, and the rejection was not contrary to incontrovertible facts, uncontested testimony, compelling inferences, or glaring improbability. The trial judge gave adequate reasons for that credibility finding, and the Appellant's challenges to the findings of undue influence and unconscionable conduct depended on overturning that rejection of evidence.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
03 June 2008
Procedural Posture
Equity Appeal Concerning Undue Influence and Unconscionable Conduct in Transfer of Real Property / Appeal to the New South Wales Court of Appeal From the Supreme Court of New South Wales, Equity Division
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['undue Influence' 'unconscionable Conduct' 'constructive Trust' 'credibility of Witnesses' 'appellate Review of Factual Findings' 'adequacy of Reasons' 'presumption of Advancement']
['equity' 'evidence' 'civil Procedure' 'real Property'] ['undue Influence' 'unconscionable Conduct' 'constructive Trust' 'credibility of Witnesses' 'appellate Review of Factual Findings' 'adequacy of Reasons' 'presumption of Advancement']

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 Appeal Concerning Undue Influence and Unconscionable Conduct in Transfer of Real Property / Appeal to the New South Wales Court of Appeal From the Supreme Court of New South Wales, Equity Division

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the trial judge erred in rejecting the evidence of the solicitor who attended the execution of the conveyancing documents.' "Whether the trial judge's factual findings based in part on credibility and demeanour should be set aside on appeal." "Whether the trial judge gave adequate reasons for rejecting the solicitor's evidence." "Whether the findings of undue influence and unconscionable conduct were infected by any erroneous rejection of the solicitor's evidence."]

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed because the Court of Appeal was not persuaded that the trial judge was wrong to reject Mr Lee's evidence as reconstruction rather than independent recollection, and the rejection was not contrary to incontrovertible facts, uncontested testimony, compelling inferences, or glaring improbability. The trial judge gave adequate reasons for that credibility finding, and the Appellant's challenges to the findings of undue influence and unconscionable conduct depended on overturning that rejection of evidence.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ['Appeal dismissed with costs.']