Court of Appeal
Supreme Court
New South Wales
- Summary available
- Amendment notes
Medium Neutral Citation: Fayad v B & G Properties Pty Ltd [2022] NSWCA 129 Hearing dates: 18 July 2022 Decision date: 22 July 2022 Before: Bell CJ at [1];
Leeming JA at [2];
Basten AJA at [41].Decision: Appeal dismissed with costs.
Catchwords: CONTRACTS – construction – loan agreement – construction of clause imposing default interest – whether interest accrued only on outstanding principal, or entire indebtedness – whether default interest unenforceable as penalty
Cases Cited: A F C Holdings Pty Ltd v Shiprock Holdings Pty Ltd [2010] NSWSC 985
Andrews v Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Ltd (2012) 247 CLR 205; [2012] HCA 30
Ankar Pty Ltd v National Westminster Finance (Australia) Ltd (1987) 162 CLR 549; [1987] HCA 15
Beaufort Developments (NI) Ltd v Gilbert-Ash NI Ltd [1999] 1 AC 266
Central Coast Council v Norcross Pictorial Calendars Pty Ltd [2021] NSWCA 75
Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Co Ltd v New Garage and Motor Co Ltd [1915] AC 79
Kay v Playup Australia Pty Ltd [2020] NSWCA 33
Vauxhall Motors Ltd (formerly General Motors UK Ltd) v Manchester Ship Canal Co Ltd [2020] AC 1161; [2019] UKSC 46
XL Insurance Co SE v BNY Trust Company of Australia Ltd [2019] NSWCA 215
Texts Cited: D McLauchlan, “The lingering confusion and uncertainty in the law of contract interpretation” [2015] LMCLQ 406
Category: Principal judgment Parties: Sam Fayad (Appellant)
B & G Properties Pty Ltd (Respondent)Representation: Counsel:
Solicitors:
S J Stanton (Appellant)
S Mirzabegian SC; D T Wong (Respondent)
Madison Marcus Law Firm (Appellant)
Gilbert + Tobin (Respondent)
File Number(s): 2021/337207 Publication restriction: Nil Decision under appeal
- Court or tribunal:
- Supreme Court of New South Wales
- Jurisdiction:
- Equity – Commercial List
- Citation:
- Date of Decision:
- 01 November 2021
- Before:
- Ball J
- File Number(s):
- 2021/102379
HEADNOTE
[This headnote is not to be read as part of the judgment]
The appellant, Mr Sam Fayad, was the guarantor of a $4 million loan by the respondent, B & G Properties Pty Ltd, to his company, NR Developers Pty Ltd. The money was advanced pursuant to a written agreement dated 16 February 2015 which provided for repayment of the principal after 6 months, plus interest at a rate of 25% pa. The interest component was to be paid in two instalments of $250,000. Clause 4 provided in part that “Default fees and charges will be at the rate of thirty (30%) per centum of the advance per annum or part thereof.”
It was common ground that no repayment of the principal sum was made. Payments of some interest were made. By Deed of Variation in July 2018 and Deed of Further Variation in November 2018, the Final Repayment Date was amended to 15 November then 15 December 2018. The outstanding “fees and charges” were ultimately specified at $1,483,333. Clause 4 was not amended.
The issues on appeal were (i) whether the default rate of interest…
Continue reading Fayad v B & G Properties Pty Ltd
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Fayad v B & G Properties Pty Ltd [2022] NSWCA 129
- Case
- [2022] NSWCA 129
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court was required to determine two primary legal issues. Firstly, it had to ascertain the correct construction of the default interest clause within the loan agreement. Secondly, the court needed to consider whether the default interest, as construed, was unenforceable as a penalty at common law.
The Court of Appeal held that the default interest clause was to be construed as applying to the entire indebtedness, not merely the outstanding principal. In reaching this conclusion, the court applied principles of contractual construction, emphasizing the ordinary meaning of the words used in the clause and the context of the agreement as a whole. The court further found that the default interest was not an unenforceable penalty, as it did not demand a sum disproportionate to the legitimate interest of the lender in performance of the contract.
The appeal was dismissed, and Fayad was ordered to pay the costs of B & G Properties.
Orders
Orders of the court
Appeal dismissed with 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.