Post-contractual conduct is admissible on the question of whether a contract was formed and to identify the contracting parties, though it remains inadmissible on the question of what the contract means. Statements by a party in correspondence and prior court proceedings referring to a company as the borrower constitute admissions as to the identity of the contracting party. The broader question of the admissibility of post-contractual conduct as an aid to contract construction remains unsettled in Australian law.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 29 later cases that cite this judgment.
6 of the 29 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.