Coulls v Bagot's Executor & Trustee Co Ltd [1967] HCA 3

Coulls v Bagot's Executor & Trustee Co Ltd [1967] HCA 3

The majority held that the agreement was not an assignment or a revocable mandate, but created a contractual right for Doris Sophia Coulls as joint promisee with her husband to receive royalties, and, as survivor, to claim them after his death. Consideration provided by Arthur Leopold Coulls sufficed for both joint promisees. Therefore, O'Neil Construction Pty Ltd is bound and entitled to pay royalties to her. The executor has no entitlement to royalties or to indemnity or contribution regarding the mortgage. No requirement for Doris Sophia Coulls to elect between benefits exists.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Procedural Posture
Appeals (joined) From Supreme Court of South Australia / High Court of Australia (full Court) Decision
Outcome
Appeal(s) allowed in part, dismissed in part. Declarations and orders of the Supreme Court of South Australia set aside in part, substituted answers given. Application under Testator's Family Maintenance Act remitted for hearing.
Legal Topics
['privity of Contract' 'consideration' 'assignment of Contractual Rights' 'joint Tenancy' "testator's Family Maintenance" 'indemnity and Contribution' 'specific Performance' 'third Party Beneficiaries']
['contract Law' 'succession Law' 'equity'] ['privity of Contract' 'consideration' 'assignment of Contractual Rights' 'joint Tenancy' "testator's Family Maintenance" 'indemnity and Contribution' 'specific Performance' 'third Party Beneficiaries']

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

Appeals (joined) From Supreme Court of South Australia / High Court of Australia (full Court) Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the agreement between Arthur Leopold Coulls and O'Neil Construction Pty Ltd created contractual rights to royalties for Doris Sophia Coulls following the testator's death." 'Whether Doris Sophia Coulls is entitled to the royalties as assignee or joint promisee or otherwise, or only by the mandate.' 'Whether the executor is entitled to indemnity or contribution from Doris Sophia Coulls regarding mortgage payments.' 'Whether Doris Sophia Coulls must elect between her entitlement to royalties and benefits under cl. 7 of the will.']

Ratio Decidendi

The majority held that the agreement was not an assignment or a revocable mandate, but created a contractual right for Doris Sophia Coulls as joint promisee with her husband to receive royalties, and, as survivor, to claim them after his death. Consideration provided by Arthur Leopold Coulls sufficed for both joint promisees. Therefore, O'Neil Construction Pty Ltd is bound and entitled to pay royalties to her. The executor has no entitlement to royalties or to indemnity or contribution regarding the mortgage. No requirement for Doris Sophia Coulls to elect between benefits exists.

Court Disposition

Appeal(s) allowed in part, dismissed in part. Declarations and orders of the Supreme Court of South Australia set aside in part, substituted answers given. Application under Testator's Family Maintenance Act remitted for hearing.

Orders

  • ["O'Neil Construction Pty. Ltd. is entitled and bound to pay the royalties under the agreement to Doris Sophia Coulls as surviving joint promisee." 'The executor is not entitled to receive or hold the royalties except on behalf of Doris Sophia Coulls if received.' "Application under the Testator's Family Maintenance...