BEASLEY & BEASLEY

In the matter of *Beasley & Beasley*, Newbrun J of the Supreme Court of New South Wales considered a dispute concerning the interpretation of a deed of settlement and a subsequent application to set aside that deed. The applicant, Ms. Beasley, sought to have the deed, which had been entered into between herself and the respondent, Mr. Beasley, declared void and unenforceable.

The central legal issues before the Court were whether the deed of settlement was voidable on the grounds of unconscionable conduct, and if so, whether it should be set aside. Ms. Beasley contended that the circumstances surrounding the execution of the deed rendered it unconscionable, thereby vitiating her consent and making the agreement unenforceable.

Newbrun J analysed the principles of unconscionable conduct as established in Australian equity law, particularly focusing on the requirements for establishing such a claim. The Court considered the relative positions of the parties, the nature of the transaction, and whether one party had taken unfair advantage of the other's special disadvantage. After a thorough examination of the evidence presented, the Court found that the applicant had not established the necessary elements to prove unconscionable conduct. Consequently, the application to set aside the deed was dismissed.