Wedeco v Precision One Off Engineering [2004] NSWSC 813

Wedeco v Precision One Off Engineering [2004] NSWSC 813

The Court preferred the evidence of Mr Dive and Mr Dunn over that of Mr McLean and Mr Thrift, relying on the unsigned receipt portion of the acknowledgment, inconsistencies in Mr McLean's evidence, and Mr McLean's email of 18 November 2003. The agreed variation required Precision to provide the remaining items in tax invoice 560 except the polishing machine and standard gauges. Interest on the $100,000 was refused because that sum was paid for other settlement items as well, most of which had been delivered.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 September 2004
Procedural Posture
Summons Concerning Terms of Settlement of District Court Proceedings and Delivery Up of Goods / Judgment After Hearing; Parties Directed to Bring in Short Minutes of Orders and Costs to Be Heard
Outcome
Wedeco obtained an order for delivery of the remaining items on tax invoice 560 except the polishing machine and standard gauges; the claim for interest was refused.
Legal Topics
['offer and Acceptance' 'terms of Settlement' 'agreed Variation' 'delivery Up of Goods' 'interest']
['contract Law'] ['offer and Acceptance' 'terms of Settlement' 'agreed Variation' 'delivery Up of Goods' 'interest']

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

Summons Concerning Terms of Settlement of District Court Proceedings and Delivery Up of Goods / Judgment After Hearing; Parties Directed to Bring in Short Minutes of Orders and Costs to Be Heard

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the agreed variation to the settlement required Precision to deliver the remaining items on tax invoice 560, excluding the polishing machine and standard gauges.' 'Whether the variation was as deposed by Wedeco or by Precision.' 'Whether Precision should pay interest on the $100,000 settlement sum from 17 November 2003 until compliance with any delivery order.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Court preferred the evidence of Mr Dive and Mr Dunn over that of Mr McLean and Mr Thrift, relying on the unsigned receipt portion of the acknowledgment, inconsistencies in Mr McLean's evidence, and Mr McLean's email of 18 November 2003. The agreed variation required Precision to provide the remaining items in tax invoice 560 except the polishing machine and standard gauges. Interest on the $100,000 was refused because that sum was paid for other settlement items as well, most of which had been delivered.

Court Disposition

Wedeco obtained an order for delivery of the remaining items on tax invoice 560 except the polishing machine and standard gauges; the claim for interest was refused.

Orders

  • ['The defendant is to deliver up to the plaintiff the remaining items on tax invoice 560, except the polishing machine and the standard gauges.' 'The parties are directed to bring in short minutes of orders reflecting the reasons.' 'The parties will be heard on costs.']