Green v Worley

The appellants, E. A. & D. Green, a firm of timber merchants, appealed to the High Court of Australia by special leave from a decision of the Supreme Court of Victoria. The dispute arose from a written agreement where the respondent, William Worley, agreed to pay the sum of £70 19s. 8d. "out of moneys due to" one A. J. Rosenfeldt, a contractor building a house for Worley. The County Court had found in favour of the Greens, holding that Worley was estopped by his verbal admissions from denying that money was due to Rosenfeldt. The Supreme Court, however, reversed this decision.

The legal issues before the High Court were whether the Supreme Court erred in reversing the County Court's finding and whether a question of law was involved in the appeal. Specifically, the court considered whether Worley's admissions created an estoppel preventing him from denying that sufficient funds were due to Rosenfeldt under the building contract, and whether the Supreme Court was entitled to overturn the County Court's factual determination on this point.

The High Court, in rescinding the special leave to appeal, reasoned that the core of the dispute concerned the proper inference to be drawn from the evidence, which is a question of fact, not law. The Chief Justice noted that the Supreme Court had considered the evidence and concluded that it did not establish the necessary estoppel, particularly in light of the ambiguity of the language used and the plaintiff's own evidence. Even if the Supreme Court's conclusion on the facts was considered erroneous, the High Court found no question of law was raised, suggesting the special leave had been granted inadvertently.

Consequently, the High Court rescinded the special leave to appeal and ordered the appellants to pay the costs of the appeal.