Haggarty v Wood (No 2)

[2015] QSC 244

Supreme Court of Queensland

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Summary judgment
3. › Summary judgment for defendant
4. › Whether plaintiff has no real prospect of succeeding
5. › Whether there is no need for a trial
6. › Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Qld), r 293
1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Summary judgment
3. › Relationship between summary judgment and demurrer
4. › Historical development of summary disposal procedures
5. › Whether summary judgment operates as res judicata unlike striking out
1. Equity
2. › Constructive trusts
3. › Claim for constructive trust over shares
4. › Whether breach of testamentary contract by deceased gives rise to constructive trust against third party recipient of shares by survivorship
5. › Whether equitable interest in shares must be established prior to transfer
1. Contract
2. › Testamentary contracts
3. › Alleged contract to make testamentary dispositions
4. › Whether testamentary contract concerning company-owned land enforceable against shareholder
5. › Separate legal personality of company

Quick Take

Summary judgment under UCPR r 293 operates as a res judicata or cause of action estoppel, unlike an order striking out a proceeding. Where the difficulty with a plaintiff's case lies in the absence of a factual stratum to make a necessary allegation (rather than merely a failure to plead it), r 293 is properly engaged. A claim for a constructive trust over shares based on an alleged testamentary contract concerning company-owned land will fail where the separate legal personality of the company is not addressed, no equitable interest in the shares is established prior to transfer, and no unconscionable conduct is alleged against the defendant personally.