Legal Research
Cases
Chapple v Ghirardi Corporation Pty Ltd

Chapple v Ghirardi Corporation Pty Ltd

Case [1999] WASC 237 30 November 1999

Equitable Estoppel

Unconscionable Conduct

Implied Terms

Adverse Possession

Property Law

No judgment structure available for this case.

Type to search within this case.

CHAPPLE -v- GHIRARDI CORPORATION PTY LTD & ORS [1999] WASC 237

Jurisdiction:	SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA	Citation No:	[1999] WASC 237
Case No:	CIV:1120/1997	Heard:	23-24, 27 AUGUST & 3 SEPTEMBER 1999
Coram:	WALLWORK J	Delivered:	30/11/99
No of pages:	23	Judgment Part:	1 of 1
Result:	Plaintiff can remain in property for as long as she desires
PDF Version

Parties:	ELIZABETH JANE CHAPPLE GHIRARDI CORPORATION PTY LTD PATRICK JOHN GHIRARDI JOANNE ELIZABETH GHIRARDI
Catchwords:	Equity Plaintiff contributed money towards purchase of home Condition that she could live there for life Name not on title Whether equity created
Legislation:	Statute of Frauds , s 4 Property Law Act 1989, s 34
Case References:	Bannister v Bannister [1948] 2 All ER 133 Inwards v Baker [1965] 2 QB 29 Baumgartner v Baumgartner (1987) 164 CLR 137 Calverley v Green (1984) 155 CLR 242 Dellaca v PDL Industries (1992) 3 NZLR 88 Jones v Padavatton [1969] 2 All ER 616, [1969] 1 WLR 328 Tracy v Bifield (1998) 23 Fam LR 260

JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA

IN CIVIL

CITATION : CHAPPLE -v- GHIRARDI CORPORATION PTY LTD & ORS [1999] WASC 237 CORAM : WALLWORK J HEARD : 23-24, 27 AUGUST & 3 SEPTEMBER 1999 DELIVERED : 30 NOVEMBER 1999 FILE NO/S : CIV 1120 of 1997 BETWEEN : ELIZABETH JANE CHAPPLE

Plaintiff

AND

GHIRARDI CORPORATION PTY LTD

First Defendant

PATRICK JOHN GHIRARDI

Second Defendant

JOANNE ELIZABETH GHIRARDI

Third Defendant

Catchwords:

Equity - Plaintiff contributed money towards purchase of home - Condition that she could live there for life - Name not on title - Whether equity created

Legislation:

Statute of Frauds , s 4

Property Law Act 1989, s 34

(Page 2)

Result:

Plaintiff can remain in property for as long as she desires

Representation:

Counsel:

Plaintiff : Mr H N H Christie

First Defendant : Mr W J Chesnutt

Second Defendant : Mr W J Chesnutt

Third Defendant : Mr W J Chesnutt

Solicitors:

Plaintiff : Legal Aid Commission

First Defendant : Davies & Co

Second Defendant : Davies & Co

Third Defendant : Davies & Co

Case(s) referred to in judgment(s):

Bannister v Bannister [1948] 2 All ER 133
Inwards v Baker [1965] 2 QB 29

Case(s) also cited:

Baumgartner v Baumgartner (1987) 164 CLR 137
Calverley v Green (1984) 155 CLR 242
Dellaca v PDL Industries (1992) 3 NZLR 88
Jones v Padavatton [1969] 2 All ER 616, [1969] 1 WLR 328
Tracy v Bifield (1998) 23 Fam LR 260

(Page 3)

1 WALLWORK J: Mrs Chapple, who is now 79 years of age, claims that she has an interest in a home in Leon Road, Dalkeith. Her daughter and her daughter's husband (Mrs and Mr Ghirardi), purchased the home early in 1983. Mrs Chapple says that she contributed some money towards the purchase after an agreement with Mr Ghirardi that she could live in the house for the remainder of her life. The house would, after her death, be owned by Mr…

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 Chapple v Ghirardi Corporation Pty Ltd

Details

AGLC: Chapple v Ghirardi Corporation Pty Ltd [1999] WASC 237
Case: [1999] WASC 237
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Chapple v Ghirardi Corporation Pty Ltd involved a dispute over an agreement whereby the plaintiff, Mrs Chapple, would contribute money towards the purchase of a property in exchange for the right to live there for life. The defendants, Mr and Mrs Ghirardi, denied the existence of such an agreement and argued that the money was simply a contribution towards Mrs Chapple's living expenses. The court found that an agreement had been made and that Mrs Chapple had an equity to remain in the property for as long as she desired. The court also found that the defences of the Statute of Frauds and the Property Law Act were not applicable, as the agreement had been performed for many years. The case was based on the principles discussed in Inwards v Baker [1965] 2 QB 29, where it was held that if a person expends money on land under an expectation created or encouraged by the landlord that they will be allowed to remain there, it raises an equity in the licensee such as to entitle them to stay. The court in this case held that Mrs Chapple's equity could be satisfied by allowing her to remain in the property for as long as she desired. The court will hear from the parties as to the appropriate orders to be made if they cannot agree between themselves. Unless the court decides otherwise, the costs of the action will be awarded to Mrs Chapple to be taxed.

Orders