Tadrous v Tadrous

The appeal concerned a dispute between a brother, the appellant, and his sister, the respondent, regarding monies advanced by the respondent and her late husband to the appellant for the development of residential property. The respondent alleged that the appellant had orally assured her that upon completion of the development, he would repay the advanced monies and transfer a portion of the property to her at cost. The case was heard in the Court of Appeal of New South Wales.

The primary legal issues before the Court of Appeal were whether the respondent's expectation of repayment and transfer of property was sufficient to give rise to an equitable proprietary estoppel, and if so, whether the respondent was entitled to relief by way of an equitable charge over the property. A further issue was whether the primary judge had erred in awarding compound interest on the monies secured by the charge.

The Court of Appeal found that the respondent's expectation was indeed sufficient to give rise to an equitable estoppel. The court reasoned that the appellant's conduct, in accepting the monies and making oral assurances, had created an expectation in the respondent that she would receive a benefit from the development. The court applied the principles of equitable proprietary estoppel, which protect parties who have acted to their detriment in reliance on such assurances. The court also addressed the issue of interest, modifying the primary judge's order regarding compound interest.

The appeal was allowed in part. The order of the primary judge regarding the charge was set aside and varied to secure a specific amount of $561,360, with interest to be calculated in accordance with the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules and the Civil Procedure Act 2005. The parties were given an opportunity to agree on the precise amount, failing which they were to provide written submissions to the Court. The appellant was ordered to pay 90 percent of the respondent's costs of the appeal.