Legal Research
Cases
Agripay Pty Ltd v Byrne

Agripay Pty Ltd v Byrne

Case [2011] QCA 85 3 May 2011

Type to search within this case.

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

Agripay Pty Limited v Byrne [2011] QCA 85

PARTIES:

AGRIPAY PTY LIMITED
ACN 087 971 006
(appellant)
v
JOAN ELIZABETH BYRNE
(respondent)

FILE NO/S:

Appeal No 6920 of 2010
SC No 10085 of 2007

DIVISION:

Court of Appeal

PROCEEDING:

General Civil Appeal

ORIGINATING COURT:

Supreme Court at Brisbane

DELIVERED ON:

3 May 2011

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

3 November 2010

JUDGES:

Margaret McMurdo P, White JA and McMeekin J
Separate reasons for judgment of each member of the Court, each concurring as to the order made

ORDER:

The appeal is dismissed with costs.

CATCHWORDS:

EQUITY – GENERAL PRINCIPLES – UNDUE INFLUENCE AND DURESS – PRESUMPTION FROM RELATIONSHIP OF PARTIES – HUSBAND AND WIFE – where the respondent was guarantor for a loan agreement entered into by her husband – where the respondent sought to be relieved of the burden of her contract of suretyship on the basis of the principle in Yerkey v Jones (1940) 63 CLR 649 and Garcia v National Australia Bank Ltd (1998) 194 CLR 395 – whether the respondent did not understand the purport and effect of the transaction – whether the learned primary judge erred in his analysis of the evidence or the application of legal principles

Agripay Pty Ltd v The Estate of Murray Andrew Byrne and Anor [2010] QSC 189, cited
Bank of Victoria Limited v Mueller [1925] VLR 642; [1925] VicLawRP 74, cited
Barclays Bank Plc v O’Brien [1994] 1 AC 180; [1993] UKHL 6, cited
Blomley v Ryan (1956) 99 CLR 362; [1956] HCA 81, cited
Brueckner v The Satellite Group (Ultimo) Pty Ltd [2002] NSWSC 378, cited
Chaplin & Co Ltd v Brammall [1908] 1 KB 233, cited
Commercial Bank of Australia Ltd v Amadio (1983) 151 CLR 447; [1983] HCA 14, cited
Commonwealth v Verwayen (1990) 170 CLR 394; [1990] HCA 39, cited
Cranfield Pty Ltd v Commonwealth Bank of Australia [1998] VSC 140, cited
Fox v Percy (2003) 214 CLR 118; [2003] HCA 22, cited
Garcia v National Australia Bank Ltd (1998) 194 CLR 395; [1998] HCA 48, considered
Howes v Bishop [1909] 2 KB 390, cited
Kali Bakhsh Singh v Ram Gopal Singh (1913) LR41IndApp 23; (1913) 30 TLR 138, cited
Linderstam v Barnett (1915) 19 CLR 528; [1915] HCA 5, cited
Maguire v Makaronis (1997) 188 CLR 449; [1997] HCA 23, cited
Shears and Sons Ltd v Jones [1922] 2 Ch 802; (1922) 128 LT 218, cited
State Bank of New South Wales v Chia (2000) 50 NSWLR 587; [2000] NSWSC 552, cited
Talbot v Von Boris [1911] 1 KB 854; (1910) 27 TLR 95, cited
Turnbull and Co v Duval [1902] AC 429, cited
Yerkey v Jones (1939) 63 CLR 649; [1939] HCA 3, considered

COUNSEL:

R Bain QC, with S Bell, for the appellant
A J Greinke for the respondent

SOLICITORS:

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Agripay Pty Ltd v Byrne

Details

AGLC: Agripay Pty Ltd v Byrne [2011] QCA 85
Case: [2011] QCA 85
Decision Date: 3 May 2011

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Agripay Pty Ltd brought a case against Byrne in the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The dispute revolved around a loan agreement that Byrne had guaranteed for her husband. Byrne sought to be relieved from her obligations as a guarantor based on the principles established in Yerkey v Jones and Garcia v National Australia Bank Ltd, claiming that she did not understand the implications of the transaction. The primary judge had ruled against her, and she appealed that decision.

The central legal issues in the case were whether Byrne genuinely did not understand the nature and consequences of her guarantee and if the primary judge had erred in his interpretation of the evidence or the application of relevant legal principles. The court had to determine if there was a presumption of undue influence due to the relationship between Byrne and her husband, which could affect the enforceability of the guarantee.

The court held that Byrne did not establish that she did not understand the effect of the transaction. It found that Byrne was well aware of the nature of the guarantee and the obligations it entailed. The court noted that Byrne had prior experience with similar financial transactions and had actively participated in discussions about the loan. The court also held that the primary judge had not erred in his analysis of the evidence or the application of legal principles. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, and Agripay was awarded costs.

The court's decision upheld the enforceability of the guarantee, dismissing Byrne's appeal and affirming the lower court's ruling.

Orders

Orders of the court

The appeal is dismissed with costs.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.

Citations

AGLC Citation

Agripay Pty Ltd v Byrne [2011] QCA 85

Most Recent Citation

Morrison v 180 Capital Finance Pty Ltd (No. 2) [2012] VCC 1162

Cases citing this decision · 10 of 10 shown

Zhou v Mindarie Drive Pty Ltd
[2023] WADC 63

…Abram Steamship Co Ltd (in liq) v Westville Shipping Co Ltd (in liq) [1923] AC 773 Agripay Pty Ltd v Byrne [2011] QCA 85; [2011] 2 Qd R 501 Allcard v Skinner (1887) 36 Ch D 145 Allianz Australia Insurance Ltd v Delor Vue Apartments CTS 39788 [2022] HCA 38 Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Geowash…
Kensington Trust Singapore Limited v Cotton
[2023] VCC 845

…009 – National Credit Code (Cth); Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) Cases Cited: Yerkey v Jones (1939) 63 CLR 649; Agripay Pty Ltd v Byrne [2011] QCA 85; State Bank of NSW v Chia (2000) 50 NSWLR 587; Commonwealth Bank of Australia v Khouri [1998] VSC 128; Garcia v National Australia Bank Ltd (1998) 194 CLR 395; Wen…
La Trobe Financial Asset Management Limited v Nikolyn Pty Ltd ACN 078 833 977 in its own right and as trustee for Nikolyn Unit Trust
[2022] WASC 264

…Agripay Pty Ltd v Byrne [2011] QCA 85; (2011) 2 Qd R 501 Agripay Pty Ltd v Byrne [2011] QCA 85; (2011) 2 QdR 501 Amtel Pty Ltd v Ah Chee [2015] WASC 341 Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Ltd v Dzienciol [2001] WASC 305 Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Quantum Housing Group Pty Ltd (2021) 28…
Wang v Gao
[2020] QDC 298 Para 22

…not know the amount of the loan or its terms. I agree that the cases are quite different – see [61] above. [62][2010] QSC 189 and subsequently [2011] QCA 85.…
Taranto v Lopes
[2017] VCC 1613 Para 87

…[56]Defendants’ submissions at [87], [88] and [92], citing Agripay Pty Ltd v Byrne (2011) 2 Qd R 501 at [20], Chia (supra) at [169] and Amtel Pty Ltd v Ah Chee [2015] WASC 341…
Schultz v Bank of Queensland Ltd
[2015] QCA 208

…nt Australian Securities and Investments Commission Act 2001 (Cth), s 12CA Agripay Pty Ltd v Byrne [2011] 2 Qd R 501; [2011] QCA 85, applied Commercial Bank of Australia Ltd v Amadio (1983) 151 CLR 447; [1983] HCA 14, cited Garcia v National Australia Bank Ltd (1998) 194 CLR 395; [1998] HCA 48, applied State Ban…
AMTEL Pty Ltd v AH Chee
[2015] WASC 341 Para 12

…rt and effect of the transaction[306] which Stramit and Amtel bore the onus of proving was understood by Ms Ah Chee. [306] Cf Agripay Pty Ltd v Byrne [2011] QCA 85; [2011] 2 Qd R 501 [21] (McMurdo P), [99] (McMeekin J).…
National Australia Bank Ltd v Savage
[2013] NSWSC 1718 Para 1

…Mr Curtin also relied on dicta in Agripay Pty Limited v Byrne [2011] QCA 85; [2011] 2 Qd R 501 ( Agripay ) as supporting the proposition that benefit is to be adjudged by reference to the substance of the transaction. In Agripay , the husband and wife were both doctors. The husband borrowed money to invest in sc…
Morrison v 180 Capital Finance Pty Ltd (No. 2)
[2012] VCC 1162

…[44]See Garcia ( supra) and Agripay Pty Ltd v Byrne [2011] QCA 85 where the surety understood the nature of a guarantee but still succeeded in relying on the defence.…
Bank of Western Australia Ltd v Abdul
[2012] VSC 222 Para 1

…t was invited to examine the documents in any detail, or at all, or told what she was signing, document by document. [70] Agripay Pty Ltd v Byrne [2011] QCA 85. [71]Transcript, p 421.11 - .15 (“You know what a guarantee is, don’t you?---Um, I do now, yes. But you know then too, didn’t you, Mrs Abdul? You knew –…

View all 10 citing cases →

Cases cited in this decision · 18 of 18 shown

Agripay Pty Limited v The Estate of Murray Andrew Byrne
[2010] QSC 189 Para 1

…nsactions to the respondent or ensure that an independent person explained them to her.[6] [4]See Agripay Pty Limited v Estate of Murray Andrew Byrne [2010] QSC 189, [11]-[28]. [5]Above, [46], [47]. [6]Above, [48]-[51].…
Fox v Percy
[2003] HCA 22

…394; [1990] HCA 39, cited Cranfield Pty Ltd v Commonwealth Bank of Australia [1998] VSC 140, cited Fox v Percy (2003) 214 CLR 118; [2003] HCA 22, cited Garcia v National Australia Bank Ltd (1998) 194 CLR 395; [1998] HCA 48, considered Howes v Bishop [1909] 2 KB 390, cited Kali Bakhsh Singh v Ram Gopal Singh (19…
Brueckner v The Satellite Group (Ultimo) Pty Ltd
[2002] NSWSC 378 Para 1

…e evidence revealed that unrealised by her Ms Broster was a director of some 21 companies and had guaranteed upwards of $100 million in debt. [77][2002] NSWSC 378.…
State Bank of New South Wales Ltd v Chia
[2000] NSWSC 552 Para 1

…[3] of these reasons. [10][1998] VSC 140, [103]and [104]. [11](2000) 50 NSWLR 587, 601 referred to by the primary judge at [36], [37] of his reasons; [2000] NSWSC 552.…
Cranfield Pty Ltd v Commonwealth Bank of Australia
[1998] VSC 140 Para 1

…e eventual modest benefit, it was likely to be neither direct nor immediate. This contention is not made out. [9]Set out at [3] of these reasons. [10][1998] VSC 140, [103]and [104]. [11](2000) 50 NSWLR 587, 601 referred to by the primary judge at [36], [37] of his reasons; [2000] NSWSC 552.…
Garcia v National Australia Bank Ltd
[1998] HCA 48

…t sought to be relieved of the burden of her contract of suretyship on the basis of the principle in Yerkey v Jones (1940) 63 CLR 649 and Garcia v National Australia Bank Ltd (1998) 194 CLR 395 – whether the respondent did not understand the purport and effect of the transaction – whether the learned primary judge erred in his analysis of th…
Maguire v Makaronis
[1997] HCA 23

…pp 23; (1913) 30 TLR 138, cited Linderstam v Barnett (1915) 19 CLR 528; [1915] HCA 5, cited Maguire v Makaronis (1997) 188 CLR 449; [1997] HCA 23, cited Shears and Sons Ltd v Jones [1922] 2 Ch 802; (1922) 128 LT 218, cited State Bank of New South Wales v Chia (2000) 50 NSWLR 587; [2000] NSWSC 552, cited Talbot v…
Barclays Bank v O'Brien
[1993] UKHL 6

…89, cited Bank of Victoria Limited v Mueller [1925] VLR 642; [1925] VicLawRP 74, cited Barclays Bank Plc v O’Brien [1994] 1 AC 180; [1993] UKHL 6, cited Blomley v Ryan (1956) 99 CLR 362; [1956] HCA 81, cited Brueckner v The Satellite Group (Ultimo) Pty Ltd [2002] NSWSC 378, cited Chaplin & Co Ltd v Brammall [190…
Commonwealth v Verwayen
[1990] HCA 39

…ited Commercial Bank of Australia Ltd v Amadio (1983) 151 CLR 447; [1983] HCA 14, cited Commonwealth v Verwayen (1990) 170 CLR 394; [1990] HCA 39, cited Cranfield Pty Ltd v Commonwealth Bank of Australia [1998] VSC 140, cited Fox v Percy (2003) 214 CLR 118; [2003] HCA 22, cited Garcia v National Australia Bank L…
Commercial Bank of Australia Ltd v Amadio
[1983] HCA 14

…] NSWSC 378, cited Chaplin & Co Ltd v Brammall [1908] 1 KB 233, cited Commercial Bank of Australia Ltd v Amadio (1983) 151 CLR 447; [1983] HCA 14, cited Commonwealth v Verwayen (1990) 170 CLR 394; [1990] HCA 39, cited Cranfield Pty Ltd v Commonwealth Bank of Australia [1998] VSC 140, cited Fox v Percy (2003) 214…
Blomley v Ryan
[1956] HCA 81

…642; [1925] VicLawRP 74, cited Barclays Bank Plc v O’Brien [1994] 1 AC 180; [1993] UKHL 6, cited Blomley v Ryan (1956) 99 CLR 362; [1956] HCA 81, cited Brueckner v The Satellite Group (Ultimo) Pty Ltd [2002] NSWSC 378, cited Chaplin & Co Ltd v Brammall [1908] 1 KB 233, cited Commercial Bank of Australia Ltd v A…
Linderstam v Barnett
[1915] HCA 5

…considered Howes v Bishop [1909] 2 KB 390, cited Kali Bakhsh Singh v Ram Gopal Singh (1913) LR41IndApp 23; (1913) 30 TLR 138, cited Linderstam v Barnett (1915) 19 CLR 528; [1915] HCA 5, cited Maguire v Makaronis (1997) 188 CLR 449; [1997] HCA 23, cited Shears and Sons Ltd v Jones [1922] 2 Ch 802; (1922) 128 LT 218, cited Stat…
Yerkey v Jones
[1939] HCA 3

…v Von Boris [1911] 1 KB 854; (1910) 27 TLR 95, cited Turnbull and Co v Duval [1902] AC 429, cited Yerkey v Jones (1939) 63 CLR 649; [1939] HCA 3, considered COUNSEL: R Bain QC, with S Bell, for the appellant A J Greinke for the respondent SOLICITORS: Forbes Dowling Lawyers for the appellant Shannon Donaldson Pr…
[1994] 1 AC 180
[1994] 1 AC 180

…Anor [2010] QSC 189, cited Bank of Victoria Limited v Mueller [1925] VLR 642; [1925] VicLawRP 74, cited Barclays Bank Plc v O’Brien [1994] 1 AC 180; [1993] UKHL 6, cited Blomley v Ryan (1956) 99 CLR 362; [1956] HCA 81, cited Brueckner v The Satellite Group (Ultimo) Pty Ltd [2002] NSWSC 378, cited Chaplin & Co Ltd…
[1902] AC 429
[1902] AC 429 Para 1

…in Duval where the document the wife signed “was very different from what she supposed it to be”.[115] [110](1939) 63 CLR 649 at 681. [111][1902] AC 429. [112][1908] 1 KB 233. [113](1922) 128 LT 218. [114]See the summary of facts at p234. [115]At p 238.…
[1909] 2 KB 390
[1909] 2 KB 390 Para 1

…d not £400 as the note recorded and judgment was limited to the £100 – that is the wife was held liable to the extent of her understanding. [116][1909] 2 KB 390, 100 L.T. 826. [117](1910) 27 TLR 95, [1911] 1 KB 854 , 104 L.T. 524 per Phillimore J.…
[1911] 1 KB 854
[1911] 1 KB 854 Para 1

…ed to the £100 – that is the wife was held liable to the extent of her understanding. [116][1909] 2 KB 390, 100 L.T. 826. [117](1910) 27 TLR 95, [1911] 1 KB 854 , 104 L.T. 524 per Phillimore J.…
[1908] 1 KB 233
[1908] 1 KB 233 Para 1

…document the wife signed “was very different from what she supposed it to be”.[115] [110](1939) 63 CLR 649 at 681. [111][1902] AC 429. [112][1908] 1 KB 233. [113](1922) 128 LT 218. [114]See the summary of facts at p234. [115]At p 238.…

Legislation cited in this decision · 0

No legislation cited in this case.

CITATION:	Agripay Pty Limited v Byrne [2011] QCA 85
PARTIES:	AGRIPAY PTY LIMITED ACN 087 971 006 (appellant) v JOAN ELIZABETH BYRNE (respondent)
FILE NO/S:	Appeal No 6920 of 2010 SC No 10085 of 2007
DIVISION:	Court of Appeal
PROCEEDING:	General Civil Appeal
ORIGINATING COURT:	Supreme Court at Brisbane
DELIVERED ON:	3 May 2011
DELIVERED AT:	Brisbane
HEARING DATE:	3 November 2010
JUDGES:	Margaret McMurdo P, White JA and McMeekin J Separate reasons for judgment of each member of the Court, each concurring as to the order made
ORDER:	The appeal is dismissed with costs.
CATCHWORDS:	EQUITY – GENERAL PRINCIPLES – UNDUE INFLUENCE AND DURESS – PRESUMPTION FROM RELATIONSHIP OF PARTIES – HUSBAND AND WIFE – where the respondent was guarantor for a loan agreement entered into by her husband – where the respondent sought to be relieved of the burden of her contract of suretyship on the basis of the principle in Yerkey v Jones (1940) 63 CLR 649 and Garcia v National Australia Bank Ltd (1998) 194 CLR 395 – whether the respondent did not understand the purport and effect of the transaction – whether the learned primary judge erred in his analysis of the evidence or the application of legal principles Agripay Pty Ltd v The Estate of Murray Andrew Byrne and Anor [2010] QSC 189, cited Bank of Victoria Limited v Mueller [1925] VLR 642; [1925] VicLawRP 74, cited Barclays Bank Plc v O’Brien [1994] 1 AC 180; [1993] UKHL 6, cited Blomley v Ryan (1956) 99 CLR 362; [1956] HCA 81, cited Brueckner v The Satellite Group (Ultimo) Pty Ltd [2002] NSWSC 378, cited Chaplin & Co Ltd v Brammall [1908] 1 KB 233, cited Commercial Bank of Australia Ltd v Amadio (1983) 151 CLR 447; [1983] HCA 14, cited Commonwealth v Verwayen (1990) 170 CLR 394; [1990] HCA 39, cited Cranfield Pty Ltd v Commonwealth Bank of Australia [1998] VSC 140, cited Fox v Percy (2003) 214 CLR 118; [2003] HCA 22, cited Garcia v National Australia Bank Ltd (1998) 194 CLR 395; [1998] HCA 48, considered Howes v Bishop [1909] 2 KB 390, cited Kali Bakhsh Singh v Ram Gopal Singh (1913) LR41IndApp 23; (1913) 30 TLR 138, cited Linderstam v Barnett (1915) 19 CLR 528; [1915] HCA 5, cited Maguire v Makaronis (1997) 188 CLR 449; [1997] HCA 23, cited Shears and Sons Ltd v Jones [1922] 2 Ch 802; (1922) 128 LT 218, cited State Bank of New South Wales v Chia (2000) 50 NSWLR 587; [2000] NSWSC 552, cited Talbot v Von Boris [1911] 1 KB 854; (1910) 27 TLR 95, cited Turnbull and Co v Duval [1902] AC 429, cited Yerkey v Jones (1939) 63 CLR 649; [1939] HCA 3, considered
COUNSEL:	R Bain QC, with S Bell, for the appellant A J Greinke for the respondent
SOLICITORS: