Joseph Gomes v Moono Constructions Pty Ltd [2012] NSWSC 909

Joseph Gomes v Moono Constructions Pty Ltd [2012] NSWSC 909

The Court found that on 1 June 2011 the parties made a binding oral settlement agreement. The formal, unqualified statement to the CTTT bench that the matter had settled for $165,000 inclusive of costs plus the marked certificates, together with contemporaneous file notes and subsequent admissions, showed a Masters v Cameron class one agreement intended to bind immediately. The evidence was admissible because the formal statement to the bench was not a thing said in a mediation session within s 62(4), and in any event the circumstances implied consent under s 62(6) to use the agreement and related material for enforcement. No 28 day payment term was proved, so a reasonable time for...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
31 July 2012
Procedural Posture
Equity Proceedings for Specific Performance of an Alleged Settlement Agreement / Final Judgment
Outcome
Specific performance granted of the agreement to settle the CTTT proceedings.
Legal Topics
['specific Performance' 'settlement Agreement' 'cttt Mediation' 'admissibility of Mediation Evidence' 'masters V Cameron Class One Agreement' 'implied Reasonable Time for Payment']
['equity' 'contract Law' 'civil Procedure'] ['specific Performance' 'settlement Agreement' 'cttt Mediation' 'admissibility of Mediation Evidence' 'masters V Cameron Class One Agreement' 'implied Reasonable Time for Payment']

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 Proceedings for Specific Performance of an Alleged Settlement Agreement / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the CTTT proceedings were settled at mediation on 1 June 2011.' 'What the terms of any settlement agreement were.' 'Whether evidence of what occurred at the mediation was inadmissible under Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal Act 2001 (NSW), s 62.' 'Whether the parties intended to be immediately bound or only bound after execution of written terms.' 'Whether a 28 day payment term was agreed or a reasonable time for payment should be implied.' 'Whether the settlement agreement should be specifically performed.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Court found that on 1 June 2011 the parties made a binding oral settlement agreement. The formal, unqualified statement to the CTTT bench that the matter had settled for $165,000 inclusive of costs plus the marked certificates, together with contemporaneous file notes and subsequent admissions, showed a Masters v Cameron class one agreement intended to bind immediately. The evidence was admissible because the formal statement to the bench was not a thing said in a mediation session within s 62(4), and in any event the circumstances implied consent under s 62(6) to use the agreement and related material for enforcement. No 28 day payment term was proved, so a reasonable time for...

Court Disposition

Specific performance granted of the agreement to settle the CTTT proceedings.

Orders

  • ['The defendant is to pay the plaintiffs $165,000 inclusive of costs.' 'The defendant is to provide the plaintiffs the technical certificates ticked in the copy of the 11 May 2011 facsimile.' 'Process dismissing the CTTT proceedings is to be filed.' 'The parties are directed to bring in short minutes of order to...