Anjoul v Anjoul (No 3)

The case of Anjoul v Anjoul (No 3) involved a dispute between the parties regarding the enforcement of a deed, with the defendant seeking to defend its enforcement on the grounds of unconscionable conduct and the Contracts Review Act 1980 (NSW), section 7. The dispute came before the court for resolution, with the primary focus on the defendant's defence of unconscionable conduct and the implications of the Contracts Review Act. The court was tasked with determining whether the defendant's conduct was unconscionable, and if so, whether the deed should be declared void. Additionally, the court needed to consider the principle of "they who seek equity must do equity," and whether the defendant ought to compensate the plaintiff as a condition to making the order.

The court examined the evidence presented, including expert reports on the over-capitalisation of a residential property renovation, and assessed the competing arguments regarding the quantum of compensation payable to the plaintiff. The court found that the defendant's conduct was indeed unconscionable, leading to the decision that the deed should be declared void. However, the court also determined that the defendant ought to pay compensation to the plaintiff as a condition to the order, in accordance with the principle of "they who seek equity must do equity." The court granted the parties leave to adduce certain evidence on the issue of the quantum of compensation payable to the plaintiff.

Ultimately, the court ordered that the plaintiff was entitled to $400,000 in compensation. This decision recognised the need for the defendant to compensate the plaintiff for the unconscionable conduct and the resulting voiding of the deed. The court's reasoning and outcome demonstrated a careful consideration of the legal principles at play and the evidence presented, resulting in a fair and just resolution to the dispute.