Whalebone v Andrews [2016] NSWDC 149

Whalebone v Andrews [2016] NSWDC 149

The Court was not persuaded that the asserted contract was formed because, although Mr Whalebone communicated willingness to accept the 13 November 2008 offer, the absence of evidence of a lease term and start date, the absence of payment, and the late November proposal concerning rent and trucks indicated that the arrangement was not finalised and may have involved a counter-offer. The plant was not converted merely by exclusion from the farm, but Mr Andrews converted the stock sales income by selling or treating the cattle as his own and not accounting to Mr Whalebone for his 75% interest.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
30 June 2016
Procedural Posture
Civil / Principal Judgment
Outcome
Judgment for the plaintiff against the defendant in the sum of $117,274.50; argument on costs reserved.
Legal Topics
['offer and Acceptance' 'counter Offer' 'lease Agreement' 'conversion' 'plant and Stock']
['contract' 'tort'] ['offer and Acceptance' 'counter Offer' 'lease Agreement' 'conversion' 'plant and Stock']

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 / Principal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether Mr Whalebone and Mr Andrews reached an agreement for Mr Andrews to rent the property and buy Mr Whalebone's share of the stock and plant and equipment in accordance with the 13 November 2008 offer." 'Whether any purported acceptance was defeated by a counter-offer.' 'Whether Mr Andrews converted plant or stock owned in part by Mr Whalebone.' 'What damages, if any, should be awarded for conversion of stock sales income.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Court was not persuaded that the asserted contract was formed because, although Mr Whalebone communicated willingness to accept the 13 November 2008 offer, the absence of evidence of a lease term and start date, the absence of payment, and the late November proposal concerning rent and trucks indicated that the arrangement was not finalised and may have involved a counter-offer. The plant was not converted merely by exclusion from the farm, but Mr Andrews converted the stock sales income by selling or treating the cattle as his own and not accounting to Mr Whalebone for his 75% interest.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the plaintiff against the defendant in the sum of $117,274.50; argument on costs reserved.

Orders

  • ['Judgment for the plaintiff against the defendant in the sum of $117,274.50.' 'Argument on costs to be reserved to a date to be fixed.']