Brown v Brown-Pavier - [2023] NSWSC 537

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Amendment notes

Medium Neutral Citation: Brown v Brown-Pavier [2023] NSWSC 537
Hearing dates: 8-11 May 2023
Date of orders: 22 May 2023
Decision date: 22 May 2023
Jurisdiction: Equity
Before: Darke J
Decision:
Orders to be made to give effect to transfer of rights to showground spaces from first plaintiff to second plaintiff. Cross-Claim fails.

Catchwords:
ASSOCIATIONS AND CLUBS – registered organisations – rights, duties and liabilities of members – where plaintiffs and first defendant are members of the second defendant guild registered under the Fair Work (Registered Organisations) Act 2009 (Cth) (“the Guild”) – where first plaintiff owns rights and privileges in respect of showground spaces allocated by the Guild – where first plaintiff applied to transfer her rights and privileges in respect of those spaces to the second plaintiff – where first defendant lodged objections to transfers – where transfers not effected by Guild – claim by plaintiffs seeking a declaration that the second plaintiff is entitled to be recorded as the owner of the showground spaces the subject of the transfer and an order that the Guild give effect to the transfer – where Guild files submitting appearance – held that the first plaintiff has done everything which is necessary for her to have done to effect a transfer of the legal title to the showground spaces – orders to be made to give effect to transfer
EQUITY – trusts and trustees – constructive trusts – cross-claim by first defendant seeking a declaration that a constructive trust over various showground spaces arises by virtue of the termination of a joint relationship or endeavour with the first plaintiff – whether the first plaintiff and first defendant were in a joint relationship or endeavour involving the pooling of showground spaces – pooling of showground spaces not established – requisite joint relationship or endeavour not established – held that the rights to the first plaintiff’s showground spaces are not held on constructive trust – held that first plaintiff remained free to transfer the rights to the showground spaces to the second plaintiff
ESTOPPEL – estoppel by representation – detrimental reliance – cross-claim by first defendant seeking a declaration that the first plaintiff is estopped from denying that a two-thirds share of showground spaces is held for the benefit of the first defendant – statements alleged by first defendant as giving rise to estoppel not established – estoppel not made out

Legislation Cited:
Fair Work (Registered Organisations) Act 2009 (Cth), s 27

Cases Cited:
Baumgartner v Baumgartner (1987) 164 CLR 137
Corin v Patton (1990) 169 CLR 540
Craig v Silverbrook [2013] NSWSC 1687
Muschinski v Dodds (1985) 160 CLR 583
Sidhu v Van Dyke (2014) 251 CLR 505; [2014] HCA 19

Category: Principal judgment
Parties: Doreen Gladys Brown (First Plaintiff/Cross-Defendant)
Caine Bruce Brown (Second Plaintiff)
Susan Brown-Pavier (First Defendant/Cross-Claimant)
The Showmen’s Guild of Australasia (Second Defendant)
Representation:
Counsel:
Mr P E King with Mr I Metz (Plaintiffs/Cross-Defendant)
Mr P A Horobin (First Defendant/Cross-Claimant)

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Brown v Brown-Pavier

Details

AGLC: Brown v Brown-Pavier [2023] NSWSC 537
Case: [2023] NSWSC 537
Decision Date: 22 May 2023

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The parties involved in this case were the plaintiffs, Brown, and the defendants, Brown-Pavier. The dispute related to the transfer of rights and privileges in respect of showground spaces allocated by the Guild, a registered organisation under the Fair Work (Registered Organisations) Act 2009 (Cth). The first plaintiff sought to transfer her rights and privileges in respect of the spaces to the second plaintiff, but the first defendant lodged objections to the transfer, which the Guild did not effect. The plaintiffs sought a declaration that the second plaintiff was entitled to be recorded as the owner of the spaces and an order that the Guild give effect to the transfer. The first defendant filed a cross-claim seeking a declaration that a constructive trust over the showground spaces arose by virtue of the termination of a joint relationship or endeavour with the first plaintiff. The first defendant also sought a declaration that the first plaintiff was estopped from denying that a two-thirds share of the showground spaces was held for the benefit of the first defendant.

The court was required to decide whether the first plaintiff had done everything necessary to effect a transfer of the legal title to the showground spaces, whether a constructive trust over the spaces arose by virtue of the termination of a joint relationship or endeavour, and whether the first plaintiff was estopped from denying that a two-thirds share of the spaces was held for the benefit of the first defendant. The court found that the first plaintiff had done everything necessary to effect a transfer of the legal title to the showground spaces. The court also found that the requisite joint relationship or endeavour was not established and, therefore, the rights to the first plaintiff's showground spaces were not held on constructive trust. The statements alleged by the first defendant as giving rise to estoppel were not established, and the first plaintiff was not estopped from denying that a two-thirds share of the showground spaces was held for the benefit of the first defendant.

The court held that the first plaintiff had done everything necessary to effect a transfer of the legal title to the showground spaces. The court made orders to give effect to the transfer and dismissed the first defendant's cross-claim. The first plaintiff was declared to be entitled to be recorded as the owner of the showground spaces, and the Guild was ordered to give effect to the transfer. The first defendant's cross-claim was dismissed, and the first plaintiff was held not to be estopped from denying that a two-thirds share of the showground spaces was held for the benefit of the first defendant. The rights to the first plaintiff's showground spaces were held not to be held on constructive trust.

Orders