Quinn v Bryant

[2012] NSWCA 377

Court of Appeal

New South Wales

Case Title:

Quinn v Bryant

Medium Neutral Citation:

[2012] NSWCA 377

Hearing Date(s):

13 November 2012

Decision Date:

21 November 2012

Jurisdiction:

Before:

Allsop P at [1]
Barrett JA at [2]
Sackville AJA at [3]

Decision:

(1) Appeal dismissed.

(2) The appellant pay the respondent's costs of the appeal.

[Note: The Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 provide (Rule 36.11) that unless the Court otherwise orders, a judgment or order is taken to be entered when it is recorded in the Court's computerised court record system. Setting aside and variation of judgments or orders is dealt with by Rules 36.15, 36.16, 36.17 and 36.18. Parties should in particular note the time limit of fourteen days in Rule 36.16.]

Catchwords:

EQUITY - promissory estoppel - detrimental reliance by promisee (a granddaughter) on promise by the promisor (her grandmother) to provide accommodation and leave half of her estate to the promisee - no dispute that compensation to the promisee should be assessed on an expectations basis - whether primary Judge failed to take into account that the compensation would be payable before the promisor's death and thus would be "accelerated" - no error demonstrated.

Legislation Cited:

Supreme Court Act 1970

Cases Cited:

Giumelli v Giumelli [1999] HCA 10; (1996) 196 CLR 101
Delaforce v Simpson-Cook [2010] NSWCA 84; (2010) 78 NSWLR 483

Texts Cited:

Category:

Principal judgment

Parties:

Joan Phyllis Quinn (Appellant)
Susan Bryant (Respondent)

Representation

- Counsel:

Counsel:
J A D Needham SC and F F F Salama (Appellant)
R D Wilson and D Steirn (Respondent)

- Solicitors:

Solicitors:
Vizzone Ruggero & Associates (Appellant)
Tsolakis Solicitors (Respondent)

File number(s):

2012/52197

Decision Under Appeal

- Court / Tribunal:

- Before:

Sackar J

- Date of Decision:

14 October 2011

- Citation:

Joan Phyllis Quinn v Susan Bryant [2011] NSWSC 1153

- Court File Number(s)

2011/45569

Publication Restriction:

JUDGMENT

1. ALLSOP P: I have read the reasons in draft of Sackville AJA to be published. I agree with them and with the orders proposed by his Honour.

2. BARRETT JA: I agree with Sackville AJA.

3. SACKVILLE AJA: This appeal concerns an unfortunate dispute between a grandmother ("the appellant") and a granddaughter ("the respondent"). The issue on the appeal is a very narrow one relating to the assessment of compensation payable by the appellant to the respondent and raises no question of principle.

4. The appellant commenced proceedings against the respondent in the Equity Division of the Supreme Court. She sought various declarations and orders, including a declaration that the respondent had no interest in a property at Blakehurst of which the appellant was the registered proprietor. The primary Judge dismissed the appellant's claim and she does not appeal from that order.

5. The respondent cross-claimed against the appellant seeking an order that the appellant hold the Blakehurst property upon constructive trust for the respondent for the term of the appellant's life or, alternatively an order that the respondent is entitled to a licence to occupy the…