Sha v Liu [2022] NSWSC 325

Sha v Liu [2022] NSWSC 325

A contract and enforceable guarantee existed because, although Mr Sha did not sign the written agreement, his conduct (procuring the transfer of funds into the nominated account after Ms Liu executed the agreement and sent it to his agent) constituted acceptance. Consideration moved from Mr Sha in authorising and procuring the transfer of funds from his wife's account, satisfying the requirement that consideration must move from the promisee. Thus, the loan agreement and guarantee are enforceable.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 March 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil / Principal Judgment at First Instance
Outcome
Judgment for the plaintiff
Legal Topics
['existence of Contract' 'offer and Acceptance' 'acceptance by Conduct' 'consideration' 'enforceability of Guarantee' 'pleading Requirements']
['contract Law'] ['existence of Contract' 'offer and Acceptance' 'acceptance by Conduct' 'consideration' 'enforceability of Guarantee' 'pleading Requirements']

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 / Principal Judgment at First Instance

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether a contract was entered into between the parties' 'Whether acceptance of the offer occurred by conduct rather than by a signed agreement' 'Whether consideration was provided by the promisee in support of the guarantee' 'Whether the guarantee is enforceable in light of the source of the funds credited']

Ratio Decidendi

A contract and enforceable guarantee existed because, although Mr Sha did not sign the written agreement, his conduct (procuring the transfer of funds into the nominated account after Ms Liu executed the agreement and sent it to his agent) constituted acceptance. Consideration moved from Mr Sha in authorising and procuring the transfer of funds from his wife's account, satisfying the requirement that consideration must move from the promisee. Thus, the loan agreement and guarantee are enforceable.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the plaintiff

Orders

  • ['Judgment for the plaintiff Mr Yunlong Sha against the defendant Ms Hua Liu in the amount of $992,610.44 plus interest of $159,089.62.' "Ms Liu to pay Mr Sha's costs of the proceeding as agreed or assessed, with costs of the trial calculated as if the hearing had completed in a single day."]