TRANSFIELD PTY LTD v FEIERSINGER [1988] NSWCA 160

TRANSFIELD PTY LTD v FEIERSINGER [1988] NSWCA 160

The September agreement was intended to regulate the parties' obligations prospectively from the date of its execution and not to retrospectively apply default provisions to breaches that occurred prior to that date.

Parties
Appellant: Transfield Pty Ltd; First Respondent: Feiersinger; Second Respondent: Second Respondent; Third Respondent: Third Respondent
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
28 March 1988
Procedural Posture
Contract Appeal / Appeal From Equity Division, Supreme Court of NSW
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
Construction of Contracts, Enforceability of Agreements, Effect of Superseding Agreements
Contract Law Construction of Contracts Enforceability of Agreements Effect of Superseding Agreements

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Transfield Pty Ltd

Appellant

Feiersinger

First Respondent

Second Respondent

Second Respondent

Third Respondent

Third Respondent

Procedural Posture

Contract Appeal / Appeal From Equity Division, Supreme Court of NSW

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether breaches prior to the September agreement could trigger default provisions in the September agreement
  2. 2 Proper construction of the September agreement concerning prior defaults

Ratio Decidendi

The September agreement was intended to regulate the parties' obligations prospectively from the date of its execution and not to retrospectively apply default provisions to breaches that occurred prior to that date.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed with costs.