Brewer and Anor v Martin and Ors (No.2)

In the Supreme Court of New South Wales, the applicants, Brewer and Anor, sought to strike out the defence of the respondents, Martin and Ors, in proceedings concerning a dispute over a property. The applicants contended that the defence was an abuse of process and that the respondents had no real prospect of success.

The central legal issue before the Court was whether the respondents' defence, which alleged a collateral agreement and sought to rely on equitable estoppel, constituted an abuse of process and lacked a real prospect of success. This required the Court to consider the principles governing the striking out of defences, particularly in circumstances where a party seeks to rely on equitable principles to contradict or modify the terms of a written agreement.

Justice Simpson reasoned that the respondents' defence, as pleaded, did not disclose a cause of action or a defence that could succeed. The Court found that the alleged collateral agreement was not sufficiently particularised and that the equitable estoppel claim was not made out on the facts presented. The Court emphasised that equitable estoppel cannot be used to override the clear terms of a written contract where there is no unconscionable conduct. Consequently, the defence was struck out as an abuse of process.

The Court ordered that the defence be struck out and that the applicants be granted judgment in the terms sought.