Li v Deng (No. 2) [2012] NSWSC 1245

Li v Deng (No. 2) [2012] NSWSC 1245

The plaintiff failed to prove the factual elements necessary for proprietary estoppel, resulting or constructive trust, or any enforceable promise. There was insufficient proof of her contribution to the property, nor of promises as alleged. The tort claims for malicious prosecution and abuse of process failed for lack of evidence establishing want of reasonable and probable cause or malice. Accordingly, all claims were dismissed.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
19 October 2012
Procedural Posture
Principal Judgment / Final Judgment After Trial (post Remitter From Court of Appeal)
Outcome
Plaintiff's claim dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['proprietary Estoppel' 'resulting Trust' 'constructive Trust' 'malicious Prosecution' 'abuse of Process' 'credibility of Witnesses']
['equity' 'torts' 'evidence'] ['proprietary Estoppel' 'resulting Trust' 'constructive Trust' 'malicious Prosecution' 'abuse of Process' 'credibility of Witnesses']

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

Principal Judgment / Final Judgment After Trial (post Remitter From Court of Appeal)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Did the plaintiff contribute $77,000 towards the purchase of the Roseville property?' 'Did the first defendant make the promises the plaintiff alleges regarding interest in the Roseville property?' "Did the second and third defendants have notice of the plaintiff's claim?" 'How much did the first defendant contribute to the Auburn unit?' 'Was there a proprietary estoppel, resulting trust, or constructive trust in favour of the plaintiff?' 'Was there malicious prosecution or abuse of process in relation to AVO and assault proceedings?']

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff failed to prove the factual elements necessary for proprietary estoppel, resulting or constructive trust, or any enforceable promise. There was insufficient proof of her contribution to the property, nor of promises as alleged. The tort claims for malicious prosecution and abuse of process failed for lack of evidence establishing want of reasonable and probable cause or malice. Accordingly, all claims were dismissed.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's claim dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ["Plaintiff's claim be dismissed with costs." 'The freezing orders made by the court on 27 April 2012 be dissolved.' 'Order 9 of the orders made by the court on 6 June 2012 be dissolved.' 'The first defendant be released from her undertakings given to the court on 6 June 2012.' "The duplicate Certificate of Title in...