Duress is based on illegitimate commercial pressure that is found to exist after an assessment of the nature of the pressure used and the nature of the demand which the pressure is used to support. The doctrine of duress has developed as a ground for rescinding a contract and for claiming restitution based on unjust enrichment. It is undecided whether duress is a tort¹.
In Carnegie v Nelson-Carnegie [2023] NSWSC 1379 (15 November 2023), the Plaintiff and the Defendant had been married but separated in August 2008. They also controlled a number of corporate entities including M & T Carnegie Pty Ltd as trustee for the Mark and Tanya Carnegie Family Trust (MTC), Overby Stallings Holdings Pty Ltd (Overby) and, CF Group Investments Pty Ltd (CFG). The Plaintiff and the Defendant appointed an alternative director for each of the three companies.
Use of Courts in providing judicial advice in appropriate circumstances of external administration and trust arrangements provides an opportunity for orderly and principled distribution of deficient and mixed funds held by a corporate group. This is particularly so where the administration or arrangements include intermixed funds across national borders.
In Lorenzato v Burwood Council [2020] NSWSC 1659, the Supreme Court of NSW dismissed a cross-claim brought by a vendor of a property against his solicitor.
Use of section 479(3) Corporations Act and cl 90-15 of the Insolvency Practice Schedule (Corporations) by a liquidator to obtain orders that it would be a proper course for the liquidator to consent to a settlement proposal put forward by the Insurer of a company in liquidation
Issues involved in determining whether a person is an "Officer" pursuant to section 9 of the Corporations Act
In Armada Balnaves Pte Ltd v Woodside Energy Julimar Pty Ltd [No 2] [2020] WASC 14, the Western Australian Supreme Court had cause to examine and helpfully state the principles applicable to conduct that is said to constitute an election. Those principles are applicable where there has been a choice between tow inconsistent rights and an abandonment of one of those rights.
In this section we look at the decision of the United Kingdom Supreme Court in Egon Zehnder Ltd v Tillman [2020] AC 154 in which the Court revisited the decision in Attwood v Lamont [1929] 3 KB 571.
Limits to recovery pursuant to a quantum meruit claim were reinforced by the High Court in Mann v Paterson Constructions Pty Ltd [2019] HCA 32; 93 ALJR 1164.
