Feldman v GNM Australia Ltd [2017] NSWCA 107

Feldman v GNM Australia Ltd [2017] NSWCA 107

No binding contract was formed as parties did not intend to be immediately bound by correspondence and essential terms, specifically confidentiality obligations, were not agreed; email communications were negotiations leading to intended execution of a deed, not formation of a concluded agreement; primary judge erred in staying proceedings, as applicant was deprived of right to bring defamation action.

Parties
Appellant: Yosef Yitzhak Feldman; Respondent: GNM Australia Ltd; Respondent: Melissa Davey
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
25 May 2017
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Leave to Appeal and Appeal From Permanent Stay Order
Outcome
Appeal allowed, permanent stay set aside
Legal Topics
Intention to Be Bound, Incompleteness of Contractual Terms, Confidentiality Clauses, Ostensible Authority of Solicitors, Settlement Agreements, Application of Masters V Cameron Categories
Contract Agency Defamation Intention to Be Bound Incompleteness of Contractual Terms Confidentiality Clauses Ostensible Authority of Solicitors Settlement Agreements +1 more

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 5 Authorities cited 33 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Yosef Yitzhak Feldman

Appellant

GNM Australia Ltd

Respondent

Melissa Davey

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Leave to Appeal and Appeal From Permanent Stay Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a binding agreement existed between the parties based on correspondence
  2. 2 Whether the parties intended to be bound prior to execution of a deed of release
  3. 3 Whether obligations as to confidentiality were agreed and essential

Ratio Decidendi

No binding contract was formed as parties did not intend to be immediately bound by correspondence and essential terms, specifically confidentiality obligations, were not agreed; email communications were negotiations leading to intended execution of a deed, not formation of a concluded agreement; primary judge erred in staying proceedings, as applicant was deprived of right to bring defamation action.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed, permanent stay set aside

Orders

  • Leave to appeal granted
  • Appeal allowed