Shepherd v Baster

In the Supreme Court of Western Australia, the plaintiffs, Justin Leslie Shepherd and Erin Jennifer Shepherd, sought to enforce a purported oral agreement to purchase property from the defendant, Karen Leslie Baster. The oral agreement, which was intended to be evidenced in writing, was challenged by the defendant on the basis that it contravened the statutory requirement for the creation or disposition of an interest in land to be in writing, as stipulated in the Property Law Act 1969. The court was required to determine whether the plaintiffs' statement of claim could be amended to adequately plead a cause of action and whether the proposed amendment would effectively address the statutory requirements.

The court held that the plaintiffs' initial statement of claim was insufficient as it contained an ineffective oral agreement which could not be specifically enforced. The court noted that even though there was an attempt to document the oral agreement, this did not render the agreement enforceable under the statute. The plaintiffs attempted to remedy this by proposing an amended statement of claim which included an enforceable written contract, separate from the oral agreement. The court found that the plaintiffs' proposed amendment did not adequately address the statutory requirements and did not clarify the relationship between the oral agreement and the written contract. Additionally, the court found that the amendment was not sufficiently detailed regarding a modification to the written contract.

The court decided to strike out the plaintiffs' statement of claim and allow them to bring in a fresh minute. The court also noted that the plaintiffs were entitled to amend without leave, pursuant to O 20 r 8(4). However, to avoid further delay, the matter was treated as an application for leave to amend in terms of the minute. The court will hear the parties as to the form of orders and as to costs.