Legal Research
Cases
R v Bryer

R v Bryer

Case [1994] QCA 547

Contract Formation

Limitation Periods

Compensatory Damages

Civil Litigation & Procedure

No judgment structure available for this case.

Type to search within this case.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL	[1994] QCA 547
SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

Appeal No. 242 of 1992

Brisbane

[SPA Property v. Pembroke]

S.P.A. PROPERTY AND INVESTMENT
COMPANY PTY LTD

(Plaintiff) Appellant

- and -

PEMBROKE ANTIQUES PTY LTD
(First Defendant) First Respondent

- and -

PAUL MICHAEL GEORGE and
TRACEY FRANCES GEORGE
(Second Defendants)Second Respondents
The President

Pincus J.A.

Judgment delivered 17 December 1993 Further Order made 10 February 1994

7. ORDER THAT THE RESPONDENTS PAY TO THE APPELLANT INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 18% PER ANNUM IN ACCORDANCE WITH CLAUSE 14.05 OF THE LEASE FROM 9 SEPTEMBER 1990 TO 17 DECEMBER 1993 SUCH INTEREST AMOUNTING TO $55,627.45.

Counsel:	Mr R Chesterman QC, with him P Hack, for the appellant. Mr P R Dutney QC, with him K S Howe for the respondent.
Solicitors:	P T Purcell Chadwick & Skelly for the appellant. Murphy Podmore & Associates for the respondents.

Hearing dates: 6-7 May 1993.

Details

AGLC: R v Bryer [1994] QCA 547
Case: [1994] QCA 547
Decision Date: 16/12/1994

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Supreme Court of Queensland, the case of R v Bryer involves a dispute between SPA Property and Investment Company Pty Ltd and Pembroke Antiques Pty Ltd, with Paul Michael George and Tracey Frances George also involved as parties. The central issue in the case is a contractual dispute over the enforcement of a lease agreement, specifically concerning the payment of interest under the terms of the lease. The plaintiff, SPA Property, appeals a decision from a lower court that declined to enforce the payment of interest as per the lease agreement. The defendants, Pembroke Antiques and the Georges, argue against the enforcement of this interest payment.

The primary legal issue the court had to decide was whether the lower court was correct in declining to enforce the payment of interest as stipulated in Clause 14.05 of the lease. The court had to interpret the lease agreement and determine the legal obligations of the parties under the contract. The court also had to consider the equitable principle of whether enforcing the interest payment would be unconscionable or unjust. The court examined the terms of the lease, the conduct of the parties, and the broader context of the contractual relationship.

The Court of Appeal, in its judgment, held that the lower court erred in not enforcing the interest payment as per the lease terms. The court found that the lease clearly stipulated the obligation to pay interest and that there were no equitable grounds to avoid this obligation. The court held that enforcing the interest payment was neither unconscionable nor unjust given the clear terms of the lease and the conduct of the parties. Consequently, the appeal was upheld, and the respondents were ordered to pay the appellant interest amounting to $55,627.45, plus an additional 18% per annum from 9 September 1990 to 17 December 1993.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

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.

Actions

Citations

R v Bryer [1994] QCA 547

Most Recent Citation

Baker v Chief of Army [2017] ADFDAT 3

Cases Citing This Decision

10

R v Dbi [2015] QCA 83
Citation 1

…CLR 259; [1989] HCA 35, followed R v Gale [1970] VR 669; [1970] VicRp 86, cited R v Bryer (1994) 75 A Crim R 456; [1994] QCA 547, followed R v K [1984] 1 NZLR 264; (1984) 1 CRNZ 165, considered R v Katsidis; ex parte Attorney-General (Qld) [2005] QCA 229, cited R v Main; ex parte Attorney-General (Qld) (1999) 105…
ARK v The State of Western Australia [2014] WASCA 45
Citation 2 (Para 1)

…Other useful illustrations of the application of the principles to particular facts may be found in Bryer v The Queen (1994) 75 A Crim R 456 and R v DD [2005] VSCA 308.…
R v VI [2013] QCA 218
Citation 3

…ueen (2006) 80 ALJR 614; (2006) 162 A Crim R 301; [2006] HCA 9, cited R v Bryer (1994) 75 A Crim R 456; [1994] QCA 547, cited R v Condren; ex parte Attorney-General [1991] 1 Qd R 574; (1990) 49 A Crim R 79, cited R v Daley; ex parte A-G (Qld) [2005] QCA 162, cited R v Katsidis; ex parte A-G (Qld) [2005] QCA 229,…
Coffman v The Queen [2010] WASCA 54
Citation 4 (Para 29)

…there are a number of courses open to the Court of Appeal. They include the courses, either alternative or cumulative, identified by Fitzgerald P in Bryer v The Queen (1994) 75 A Crim R 456, 458. One course is to proceed on the basis that the witness's new version of events is before the jury, and is sufficiently relevant…
PAS v The State of Western Australia [2009] WASCA 210
Citation 5

…Amiss v The State of Western Australia [2006] WASCA 171; (2006) 165 A Crim R 387 Barnes v The State of Western Australia [2004] WASCA 258 Bryer v The Queen (1994) 75 A Crim R 456 Carr v The State of Western Australia [2006] WASCA 125; (2006) 166 A Crim R 1 CJ v The State of Western Australia [2009] WASCA 42 Davies v The Ki…
Vella v The State of Western Australia [2006] WASCA 177
Citation 6

…Allwood v The Queen (1975) 18 A Crim R 120 Beamish v The Queen [2005] WASCA 62 Broadhurst v The Queen [1964] AC 441 Bryer v The Queen (1994) 75 A Crim R 456 Caswell v Powell Duffryn Associated Collieries Ltd [1940] AC 152 Cushing v The Queen [1977] WAR 7 De Gruchy v The Queen (2002) 211 CLR 85 Director of Public Prosecutio…
Mickelberg v The Queen [2004] WASCA 145
Citation 7 (Para 8)

…In R v Bryer (1994) 75 A Crim R 456 at 458, Fitzgerald P said that the ordinary application of the "fresh evidence" test would require the appellate court to consider what the jury might have done if it had the contradictory evidence from the recanting witness demonstrating that the recanting witness was, at best,…
Bourne v Elliss [2001] WASCA 290
Citation 8 (Para 4)

…In The Queen v Bryer (1994) 75 A Crim R 456 the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of Queensland dealt with a case in which an accomplice witness at trial gave evidence on appeal recanting the evidence he had given at trial inculpating the appellant. It was contended on appeal to the Court of Appeal that the recantation…
Betts v Chief of Army [2018] ADFDAT 2
Citation 9 (Para 23)

…statement been before him: cf Mickelberg v The Queen (1989) 167 CLR 259 at 273 (Mason CJ), 275 (Brennan J), 301-302 (Toohey and Gaudron JJ). See also R v Bryer (1994) 75 A Crim R 456 at 458 (Fitzgerald P); Baker v Chief of Army [2017] ADFDAT 3 at [27] (Tracey (President), Brereton and Hiley (Members) JJ). We do not…
Baker v Chief of Army [2017] ADFDAT 3
Citation 10 (Para 24)

…The following passage from the judgment of Fitzgerald P in R v Bryer (1994) 75 A Crim R 456; [1994] QCA 547 summarises the alternative conditions for setting aside a conviction on the ground of a recantation. His Honour said, at 458: A conviction is set aside on the basis of a recantation if (i) the witness’s new…

Cases Cited

0

Statutory Material Cited

0

AI Chat coming soon