Bloch v Bloch

Bloch v Bloch concerned a dispute between a father, Mr. Bloch, and his two sons, the respondents. The sons sought to have a deed of settlement, entered into between themselves and their father, set aside. The deed related to the distribution of shares in a family company, Bloch & Co. Pty Ltd, and was executed following a period of significant family discord and litigation. The High Court of Australia was tasked with determining the validity of this deed.

The central legal issues before the High Court were whether the deed of settlement was voidable on the grounds of undue influence or unconscionable conduct. Specifically, the court had to consider whether the sons had exerted undue influence over their father, or whether the terms of the settlement were so unfair as to be unconscionable, particularly given the father's vulnerable position at the time of its execution. The court also considered whether the father had received independent legal advice, and the effect of any such advice on the claims of undue influence and unconscionability.

The High Court ultimately held that the deed of settlement was not voidable. The majority of the court found that while the father was experiencing difficulties, there was insufficient evidence to establish undue influence. The court emphasised that for undue influence to be established, there must be proof that the will of the influencer has been substituted for the will of the person influenced. Furthermore, the court determined that the transaction was not unconscionable. The father had received independent legal advice, and while the terms of the settlement may not have been entirely favourable to him, they did not reach the threshold of unconscionability required to set aside a formal deed. The court noted that the sons had acted within their rights in pursuing their claims regarding the company shares, and the settlement represented a compromise of those claims.