Heilpern v Anasco

The matter before the court involved Heilpern, the plaintiff, and Anasco, the defendant. The dispute centred around a deed executed by Heilpern to Anasco, which Heilpern claimed was executed under duress and undue influence, and therefore voidable. The case was heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales. Heilpern sought to set aside the deed, arguing that it was not his true act and deed due to the influence and duress exerted by Anasco. Anasco, on the other hand, maintained that the deed was valid and enforceable as it was properly executed and acknowledged by Heilpern.

The legal issues before the court were whether the deed was substantively and procedurally unjust, and if so, whether the statutory remedies under the Contracts Review Act 1980 applied. The court was required to consider whether Heilpern had established a substantive injustice, a procedural injustice, or both, and whether Heilpern's equitable remedies should be exercised in light of these findings. Additionally, the court needed to determine whether Heilpern's equitable claim for relief was barred by the statutory remedies available under the Act.

The court found that Heilpern had established a substantive injustice as a result of Anasco's duress and undue influence. The court noted that Heilpern had not willingly executed the deed and that his consent was obtained through improper means. The court also found that there was a procedural injustice as Heilpern was not provided with the opportunity to seek independent legal advice before executing the deed. The court exercised its equitable jurisdiction to set aside the deed due to the established injustices. However, the court determined that Heilpern's equitable claim for relief was barred by the statutory remedies available under the Contracts Review Act 1980, s 7. As a result, the court declined to grant Heilpern any further equitable relief. The court considered discretionary factors, such as the delay in bringing the claim and the potential impact on third parties, before deciding not to exercise its discretionary powers to grant Heilpern any additional relief.