SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND
CITATION:
Campos v Lopes [2021] QSC 42
PARTIES:
MANUEL JOSE CAMPOS IN HIS CAPACITY AS TRUSTEE OF THE I’D RATHER BE SURFING TRUST
(applicant)
v
SERGIO LOPES(respondent)
FILE NO/S:
8135 of 2020
DIVISION:
Trial
PROCEEDING:
Originating Application
ORIGINATING COURT:
Supreme Court at Brisbane
DELIVERED ON:
10 March 2021
DELIVERED AT:
Brisbane
HEARING DATES:
28 October 2020
Applicant’s written closing submissions: 12 November 2020, Agreed chronology: 25 November 2020, Respondent’s written closing submissions: 2 December 2020JUDGE:
Flanagan J
ORDER:
1. Pursuant to s 82(1) of the Trusts Act 1973 (Qld), the Court orders that 85,400 shares in Paradigm Biopharmaceuticals Ltd currently registered in the name of the respondent are vested in the applicant.
2. I will hear the parties as to costs.
CATCHWORDS:
EQUITY – TRUSTS AND TRUSTEES – EXPRESS TRUSTS CONSTITUTED INTER VIVOS – DECLARATION OF TRUST – NECESSITY FOR INTENTION – OTHER MATTERS – where the applicant and respondent were co-directors – where shares were purchased in the name of the company – where shares were also purchased by the respondent in his own name – where the respondent purchased the shares using funds loaned from the company – where the respondent’s subsequent words and actions evidence an intention that the shares were held on trust for the applicant – whether that evidence is admissible as admissions contrary to interest
Trusts Act 1973 (Qld), s 82, s 90
Calverley v Green (1984) 155 CLR 242, applied
Charles Marshall Pty Ltd v Grimsley (1956) 95 CLR 353, applied
Kauter v Hilton (1953) 90 CLR 86, cited
Korda v Australian Executor Trustees (SA) Limited (2015) 255 CLR 62, cited
Re Tresdar Pty Ltd [2019] NSWSC 179, cited
Trustees of the Property of Cummins v Cummins (2006) 227 CLR 278, consideredCOUNSEL:
M C Long for the applicant
C Templeton for the respondent
SOLICITORS:
HWL Ebsworth Lawyers for the applicant
Law Central Legal for the respondent
Mr Campos, the applicant, and Mr Lopes, the respondent, are both accountants. On 3 May 2013 Odyssey (WA) Pty Ltd (Odyssey) was incorporated. Odyssey carried on a business known as Odyssey Business Knowledge (OBK) which delivered accounting and bookkeeping services as well as tax and wealth planning services.[1]
[1]T 1-6, lines 1-4.
From its incorporation until October 2019 Mr Campos and Mr Lopes were co‑directors of Odyssey and each held 50 per cent of the shares in the company. Mr Campos held his shares in his capacity as trustee for the I’d Rather Be Surfing Trust and Mr Lopes held his shares in his capacity as trustee for the Lopes Family Trust.
When Odyssey was incorporated both Mr Campos and Mr Lopes were resident in Western Australia. In 2014 Mr Campos moved to Queensland. OBK conducted business primarily in Western Australia and Queensland, with Mr Lopes being based in Western Australia and maintaining a predominantly Western Australia client base and Mr Campos being based in Queensland and maintaining a predominantly…
Continue reading Campos v Lopes
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Campos v Lopes [2021] QSC 42
- Case
- [2021] QSC 42
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The legal issues before the court were whether the evidence of Mr. Lopes' intention to hold the shares on trust for Mr. Campos could be admitted under the doctrine of admissions against interest and, if so, whether this evidence was sufficient to establish the existence of an express trust. The doctrine of admissions against interest allows for statements made by a party to be admitted as evidence against them when those statements are contrary to their own interest. Additionally, the court had to determine whether there was a clear intention to create a trust, considering the conduct and statements made by Mr. Lopes.
The court found that the evidence provided by Mr. Lopes, including his statements and actions, could indeed be admitted as admissions against interest. The court emphasised that the intention to create a trust must be clearly established, and the evidence in this case sufficiently demonstrated Mr. Lopes' intention that the shares were held on trust for Mr. Campos. The court was satisfied that the intention was clear and unequivocal, and the shares were therefore held on trust for the applicant. Consequently, the court ordered that the 85,400 shares in Paradigm Biopharmaceuticals Ltd, currently registered in the name of Mr. Lopes, be vested in Mr. Campos. The court reserved its decision on costs pending further submissions from the parties.
Orders
Orders of the court
1. Pursuant to s 82(1) of the Trusts Act 1973 (Qld), the Court orders that 85,400 shares in Paradigm Biopharmaceuticals Ltd currently registered in the name of the respondent are vested in the applicant.
2. I will hear the parties as to costs.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.