26 Oct 2007
The District Court could not properly reject the appellant's affidavit because there was a direct conflict of evidence and the key contemporaneous meeting minute was ambiguous on who was the client and on personal liability; the plaintiff did not establish overwhelming contradictory evidence, so summary judgment could not stand.
24 May 2007
The High Court allowed the appeal because the District Court erred in rejecting the alleged joint venture as a 'far-fetched and fanciful concoction' on affidavit; Mr Smith's affidavit raised non‑frivolous issues that required a substantive hearing and the assignment/financial institution issue required testing by cross‑examination, so summary judgment could not stand.
21 Aug 2006
The caveator failed to establish a reasonably arguable equitable interest in either property because the affidavits were unparticularised, internally inconsistent and lacked independent support; there is no evidence British Mercantile paid purchase money to give rise to a resulting trust, no basis to infer a constructive trust on the pleaded facts, and there is no evidence respondents acquired the properties with notice of any equitable rights, therefore the application to prevent lapse of caveats is dismissed.