Lawrence Nock v Robert Maddern [2017] NSWDC 216

Lawrence Nock v Robert Maddern [2017] NSWDC 216

No contract was established between the plaintiff and defendant following the plaintiff's 11 January 2010 offer; defendant did not accept proposed rates. Continued agistment was under prior arrangement, which had been waived during drought years. Promissory estoppel was not made out as no clear representation or detrimental reliance was established. Defendant is liable to pay agistment fees calculated on prior rates for six years preceding action, totaling $84,800.00 after deducting payments. Pre-judgment interest of $25,000.00 awarded under Civil Procedure Act 2005.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
28 July 2017
Procedural Posture
Civil / Verdict and Judgment
Outcome
Judgment for the plaintiff.
Legal Topics
['agistment Agreement' 'promissory Estoppel' 'breach of Contract' 'damages' 'limitation of Actions' 'pre Judgment Interest']
['contract Law' 'equity'] ['agistment Agreement' 'promissory Estoppel' 'breach of Contract' 'damages' 'limitation of Actions' 'pre Judgment Interest']

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

Civil / Verdict and Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether a contract was formed between the parties on 24 January 2010' 'If a contract was formed, what were its terms' 'Whether the defendant breached the contract by failing to pay agistment fees' 'Whether promissory estoppel arises from alleged representations by the defendant' 'Whether the plaintiff relied on any representations and suffered detriment' 'What damages flow from breach of contract or estoppel, if any']

Ratio Decidendi

No contract was established between the plaintiff and defendant following the plaintiff's 11 January 2010 offer; defendant did not accept proposed rates. Continued agistment was under prior arrangement, which had been waived during drought years. Promissory estoppel was not made out as no clear representation or detrimental reliance was established. Defendant is liable to pay agistment fees calculated on prior rates for six years preceding action, totaling $84,800.00 after deducting payments. Pre-judgment interest of $25,000.00 awarded under Civil Procedure Act 2005.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the plaintiff.

Orders

  • ['Verdict and judgment in favour of the plaintiff against the defendant in the sum of $109,800.00.' "The defendant will pay the plaintiff's costs of the proceedings." "Any application for a special costs order is to be made by way of Notice of Motion with affidavit evidence in support on 5 days' notice."]