Balagiannis v Balagiannis

The appeal concerned a dispute arising from a deed of assignment, whereby the first respondent, Mr. Balagiannis, assigned a debt of $18.5 million to his daughters, the second and third respondents. Mr. Balagiannis sought to have this assignment declared unjust under the Contracts Review Act 1980 (NSW), arguing that he was pressured into the assignment to avoid potential claims against his assets and that he did not fully comprehend the legal ramifications of the transaction, nor was he afforded an opportunity to seek independent legal advice. The primary judge had found the deed of assignment to be unjust.

The Court of Appeal was required to determine whether the primary judge erred in finding the deed of assignment unjust under the Contracts Review Act 1980 (NSW). Specifically, the court considered whether the primary judge had incorrectly taken into account the consequences of the contract for a person other than the party seeking relief under the Act, and whether the assignment, made for no consideration and having significant disadvantageous legal and practical impacts on Mr. Balagiannis, including the potential necessity of selling substantial business assets to satisfy the debt, was indeed unjust.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, upholding the primary judge's finding of injustice. The court reasoned that the assignment, made under circumstances of pressure and without independent legal advice, and with significant adverse consequences for Mr. Balagiannis, met the criteria for injustice under the Contracts Review Act 1980 (NSW). The court found no error in the primary judge's consideration of the practical and legal impacts of the assignment, even if those impacts extended beyond the immediate parties to the deed itself, as such considerations were relevant to assessing the overall justice of the transaction.

The appeal was dismissed with costs.