SHELDON v SCERRI [2008] NSWSC 892

SHELDON v SCERRI [2008] NSWSC 892

The Court found that Mr Sheldon’s account of the arrangement was more reliable: the share purchase was interlinked with disputed professional fees owed by ASE, and no trust or contract giving rise to a fiduciary duty in favour of Mr Scerri personally was established. The agreement conferred a benefit only on ASE, not Mr Scerri, and no trust relationship was created.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
29 August 2008
Procedural Posture
Civil / Judgment
Outcome
Judgment for plaintiff by consent on debt claim; judgment for cross-defendant on cross-claim
Legal Topics
['trusts' 'contract' 'professional Fees' 'specific Performance']
['equity'] ['trusts' 'contract' 'professional Fees' 'specific Performance']

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 / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether an oral trust was created in respect of shares purchased by the accountant for the client' 'Whether the shares were held pursuant to a contractual agreement or trust for the client' 'Whether the benefit of the arrangement was conferred on the client or his company' 'Whether damages or specific performance can be ordered for breach of trust or contract']

Ratio Decidendi

The Court found that Mr Sheldon’s account of the arrangement was more reliable: the share purchase was interlinked with disputed professional fees owed by ASE, and no trust or contract giving rise to a fiduciary duty in favour of Mr Scerri personally was established. The agreement conferred a benefit only on ASE, not Mr Scerri, and no trust relationship was created.

Court Disposition

Judgment for plaintiff by consent on debt claim; judgment for cross-defendant on cross-claim

Orders

  • ['Judgment for the plaintiff for the amount of professional fees claimed (by consent)' 'Judgment in favour of the cross-defendant on the cross-claim']