In Roma Pty Ltd v Adams

In Roma Pty Ltd v Adams, the appellant, Roma Pty Ltd, appealed against the decision of the Supreme Court of Queensland, which found that a deed of charge was delivered to the respondents, Adams, as per the terms of a settlement agreement. The respondents had alleged that the deed of charge had been delivered to them, which the appellant did not admit. The appellant argued that there was an agreement to release the deed of charge, but this argument was not raised until the closing oral submissions.

The legal issues before the court were whether the appellant's non-admissions should be treated as deemed admissions and whether the appellant was precluded from arguing the existence of an agreement to release the deed of charge. The court had to determine whether the deed of charge was "delivered" upon execution and if there was an agreement to release the deed of charge.

The court found that the appellant's non-admissions were to be treated as deemed admissions since the appellant did not provide any explanation for the non-admissions. The court also held that the appellant was precluded from arguing the existence of an agreement to release the deed of charge since it was not raised until the closing oral submissions. The court further found that the deed of charge was delivered upon execution, as the appellant had executed the deed of charge and gave it to the appellant's solicitor for registration. The settlement occurred before the signed charge was physically delivered, but this did not affect the delivery of the deed of charge.

The appeal was dismissed, and the appellant was ordered to pay the respondents' costs, to be assessed on the standard basis unless agreed.