Charles Theo Comino, Agathocles Agathocleous Constantine & Spero Pitsikas v Nicholas Peter Manettas; Van Cooney & Jeffrey Stuart Dunn v Nicholas Peter Manettas

The New South Wales Court of Appeal considered appeals in two related matters brought by Charles Theo Comino, Agathocles Agathocleous Constantine and Spero Pitsikas, and by Van Cooney and Jeffrey Stuart Dunn, against Nicholas Peter Manettas. The underlying dispute concerned the enforceability of certain guarantees and indemnities provided by the appellants in favour of Manettas.

The primary legal issues before the Court of Appeal were whether the guarantees and indemnities were valid and enforceable, and whether Manettas had acted in a manner that would preclude him from relying on them. Specifically, the court had to determine if the appellants had been induced to enter into the agreements by misleading or deceptive conduct, and if so, what the consequences of such conduct would be for the enforceability of the guarantees and indemnities.

The Court of Appeal analysed the conduct of Manettas in the context of the relevant legislation, particularly provisions relating to misleading or deceptive conduct. The court found that Manettas had engaged in conduct that was misleading or deceptive, and that this conduct had induced the appellants to enter into the guarantees and indemnities. Applying established legal principles, the court held that the guarantees and indemnities were therefore unenforceable against the appellants.

Consequently, the Court of Appeal allowed the appeals and set aside the orders of the lower court. The court ordered that the guarantees and indemnities be declared void and unenforceable, and that Manettas pay the costs of the appeals.