Miraki v Griffith and Anor [2020] NSWDC 417

Miraki v Griffith and Anor [2020] NSWDC 417

The plaintiff is entitled to restitution from the second defendant for the total failure of consideration, as the money was paid and no goods were supplied. The payments, whether made from plaintiff's company or by the plaintiff, were made for her benefit and under her control. The second defendant operated the business and received the funds. The first defendant, being a minor, did not affirm the contract upon reaching majority, did not benefit from the funds, and acted under his father's direction. No joint business or agency relationship was found between the defendants; thus, only the second defendant is liable.

Parties
Plaintiff: Sepideh Miraki; First Defendant: Joshua Griffith; Second Defendant: Dominic Griffith
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 August 2020
Procedural Posture
Civil / Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Verdict and judgment for the plaintiff against the second defendant in the sum of $116,279.91; second defendant to pay plaintiff's costs; judgment for the first defendant; plaintiff to pay first defendant's costs; parties may address claims for interest or alternate costs orders within 7 days.
Legal Topics
Sale of Goods, Failure of Consideration, Money Paid and Received, Total Failure of Consideration, Restitution, Monies Repayable
Contract Restitution Sale of Goods Failure of Consideration Money Paid and Received Total Failure of Consideration Monies Repayable

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 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sepideh Miraki

Plaintiff

Joshua Griffith

First Defendant

Dominic Griffith

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether money paid by the plaintiff (or her company) for goods not delivered is recoverable
  2. 2 Whether liability attached to both or either defendant for failing to deliver goods or refund monies
  3. 3 Whether the payment by a company controlled by the plaintiff affects her entitlement to restitution

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff is entitled to restitution from the second defendant for the total failure of consideration, as the money was paid and no goods were supplied. The payments, whether made from plaintiff's company or by the plaintiff, were made for her benefit and under her control. The second defendant operated the business and received the funds. The first defendant, being a minor, did not affirm the contract upon reaching majority, did not benefit from the funds, and acted under his father's direction. No joint business or agency relationship was found between the defendants; thus, only the second defendant is liable.

Court Disposition

Verdict and judgment for the plaintiff against the second defendant in the sum of $116,279.91; second defendant to pay plaintiff's costs; judgment for the first defendant; plaintiff to pay first defendant's costs; parties may address claims for interest or alternate costs orders within 7 days.

Orders

  • Verdict and judgment for the plaintiff against the second defendant in the sum of $116,279.91.
  • Second defendant to pay the plaintiff's costs as agreed or assessed.