Thomas v Hollier [1984] HCA 35
The High Court (majority: Mason, Wilson and Brennan JJ.) held there was no consideration for the appellant's personal promise and the I.O.U. was not enforceable against him personally; there was no intention or evidence to effect a novation or replace the intercompany liability with interpersonal liability. The appeal was allowed.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / High Court Appeal From the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of New South Wales
- Outcome
- Appeal allowed
- Legal Topics
- ['consideration' 'enforceability of I.o.u.' 'novation' 'company Liability' 'evidence of Debt']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / High Court Appeal From the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of New South Wales
Legal Issues
- 1 ["Whether there was consideration for the appellant's personal promise to pay the respondent the sum set out in the I.O.U." 'Whether the I.O.U. executed by the appellant created a legally enforceable debt between the parties as individuals rather than between their respective companies.']
Ratio Decidendi
The High Court (majority: Mason, Wilson and Brennan JJ.) held there was no consideration for the appellant's personal promise and the I.O.U. was not enforceable against him personally; there was no intention or evidence to effect a novation or replace the intercompany liability with interpersonal liability. The appeal was allowed.
Court Disposition
Appeal allowed
Orders
- ['Order of Court of Appeal of Supreme Court of New South Wales set aside' 'In lieu, order that the appeal to that Court be allowed with costs' 'Judgment of Cross J. set aside and judgment for the defendant against the plaintiff with costs']
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