Tran v Tran [2008] NSWSC 628

Tran v Tran [2008] NSWSC 628

The Plaintiff failed to prove that the Defendant or the Defendant's father made the alleged representations. His evidence contained serious inconsistencies, the Termination Deed was inconsistent with the alleged continuing contribution obligation, there was no corroboration from his solicitor, and the Court was not satisfied that the Defendant's contributions were substantially less than the Plaintiff's. The alleged collateral agreement and Fair Trading Act grounds therefore failed, and the Termination Deed was enforceable according to its terms.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 June 2008
Procedural Posture
Equity Division Proceedings Concerning Partnership Accounting, Enforceability of Termination Deed, Alleged Collateral Contract and Fair Trading Act Claims / Principal Judgment After Hearing
Outcome
Plaintiff failed to prove the alleged representations; the Termination Deed is enforceable against the Plaintiff according to its terms; the Defendant is entitled to payment of that part of the fund in Court representing the proceeds of sale of the Parramatta property.
Legal Topics
['collateral Contract' 'representations' 'misleading Conduct' "vendor's Lien" 'partnership Accounting' 'burden of Proof' 'credit Findings']
['equity' 'contract Law' 'partnership' 'trade Practices and Fair Trading'] ['collateral Contract' 'representations' 'misleading Conduct' "vendor's Lien" 'partnership Accounting' 'burden of Proof' 'credit Findings']

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 Division Proceedings Concerning Partnership Accounting, Enforceability of Termination Deed, Alleged Collateral Contract and Fair Trading Act Claims / Principal Judgment After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the Defendant or the Defendant's father made representations inducing the Plaintiff to enter the Termination Deed." "Whether the alleged representations formed a collateral contract performance of which was a condition of the Plaintiff's performance of the Termination Deed." 'Whether any alleged representations were misleading under s 41 of the Fair Trading Act 1987 (NSW) and justified setting aside the Termination Deed under s 72.' 'Whether the Termination Deed was enforceable and entitled the Defendant to payment from the fund in Court representing proceeds of sale of the Parramatta property.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Plaintiff failed to prove that the Defendant or the Defendant's father made the alleged representations. His evidence contained serious inconsistencies, the Termination Deed was inconsistent with the alleged continuing contribution obligation, there was no corroboration from his solicitor, and the Court was not satisfied that the Defendant's contributions were substantially less than the Plaintiff's. The alleged collateral agreement and Fair Trading Act grounds therefore failed, and the Termination Deed was enforceable according to its terms.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff failed to prove the alleged representations; the Termination Deed is enforceable against the Plaintiff according to its terms; the Defendant is entitled to payment of that part of the fund in Court representing the proceeds of sale of the Parramatta property.

Orders

  • ['A date was to be fixed for the bringing in of Short Minutes of Order, including directions necessary for further working out of the accounts and payment out of the fund in Court.' 'Argument as to costs, if any, was reserved to be heard.']