Goodridge v Barwick [2007] NSWSC 994
The defendant's case is not hopeless and should be permitted to go to trial as there are substantial disputes of fact, including whether an enforceable agreement for repayment was made or whether monies advanced were a capital investment. The application for summary judgment or to strike out the defence is refused.
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Ross Ian Goodridge; Defendant: Adrian Garfield Barwick
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 06 September 2007
- Procedural Posture
- Civil / Notice of Motion for Summary Judgment or to Strike Out Defence
- Outcome
- Plaintiff's notice of motion dismissed; plaintiff to pay defendant's costs.
- Legal Topics
- Strike Out Defence, Summary Judgment, Money Due
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Ross Ian Goodridge
Plaintiff
Adrian Garfield Barwick
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil / Notice of Motion for Summary Judgment or to Strike Out Defence
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether summary judgment or strike out of defence should be granted in respect of alleged money due under Heads of Agreement and alleged subsequent agreement; whether defendant has an arguable defence including estoppel
Ratio Decidendi
The defendant's case is not hopeless and should be permitted to go to trial as there are substantial disputes of fact, including whether an enforceable agreement for repayment was made or whether monies advanced were a capital investment. The application for summary judgment or to strike out the defence is refused.
Court Disposition
Plaintiff's notice of motion dismissed; plaintiff to pay defendant's costs.
Orders
- The plaintiff's notice of motion filed 20 August 2007 is dismissed.
- The plaintiff is to pay the defendant's costs as agreed or assessed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment