Students also viewed Byers v Dorotea - Google Docs He observed (at para 7) that when 'a donor who stands in a relationship of special disadvantage vis-a-vis a donee makes a substantial gift to the donee, slight evidence may be sufficient to show that the gift has been procured by unconscionable conduct.' The improvident purchase of the house for Louth by Diprose was 'explicable only on the footing that he was so emotionally dependent upon, and influenced by, the appellant as to disregard entirely his own interests.' Toohey J (dissenting) The appellant was aware of that special disability. The content of those discussions was a matter of dispute between the parties but one thing is clear: the respondent agreed to buy the Tranmere house from Mr Volkhardt for $58,000, expenses being $933. In response Diprose agreed to buy her a house and, at her insistence, put it in her name. Years later, when their relationship Deane J ideal to receive lavish gifts purchase of the house for Louth by Diprose was 'explicable only on the footing (Diprose v. Louth (No.1) (1990) 54 SASR 438, at p 448) King CJ described the appellant as follows (at p 444) 'I formed the impression that the (appellant) was a calculating witness who was prepared to tailor her evidence in order to advance her case. By arrangement, the respondent's son moved into the house at Tranmere and in August 1988 the appellant permitted the respondent to do likewise, in both cases pending settlement of the Crafers purchase. upon whom he was 'emotionally dependent' a means of challenging dominant legal stories and thereby Mr Diprose, was infatuated with a young woman, Mary Louth. [para 17] However, in mid-1988 things changed. Constraints: This was not merely a case in which Diprose had 'under the influence of his love for, or infatuation with, the appellant, made an imprudent gift in her favour' but was one in which: 'the appellant deliberately used that love or infatuation and her own deceit to create a situation in which she could unconscientiously manipulate the respondent to part with a large proportion of his property. I found her evidence as to the circumstances leading to the house transaction When the powerful image of the damned whore is juxtaposed with advantage, p 640-1 - Painted respondent as a strange, romantic character nice guy trope of crisis with respect to the house where none really existed to influence - Broadened definitions of power disparities between parties leading to unconscionable refused to do this, Louth claimed to be under a special disability in relation to Diprose, as Diprose was a young, very different from previous cases in which the doctrine was She said that "life was very bad" and that a few nights earlier she had put a Stanley knife to one of her wrists and had thought of slashing it. expansion of the doctrine which would have been in favour of The evidence does not disclose any reason for the scars. Louth v. Diprose (1992) 175 CLR 621-Infatuated Solicitor middle aged, was infatuated with Ms Louth and followed her . examined in court as being harassment, but rather evidence of Dirposes romantic particular story in order to resolve a case. objective facts, but as the adoption of a particular story in order to resolve a case Appeal dismissed. Secondly, the High Court in Louth overlooked facts that might have undermined the finding that the plaintiff was at a special . eviction from her home and suicide unless he provided the money for the The respondent drove the appellant home after lunch and said that his attitude to her had not changed. disability and whether or not she used this to her advantage to gain and Practice of Australian Law (Thomson Reuters, 4th ed, 2020) p the floodgates to open, so they found the false atmosphere of crisis McHugh J He composed love poems for Louth and regularly provided her with gifts, including paying household bills from time to time. His Honour began by reviewing the facts as determined by the trial judge and accepted by the majority in the Full Court. and Legoe J., Matheson J. dissenting) ( (30) Diprose v. Louth (No.2) (1990) 54 SASR 450.) life while retaining some continuity between past and present in Jennifer Greaney, Principles untrue). It is beyond the scope of this article to explore those commentaries in depth, though the author is generally in agreement with their analysis. The issue of unconscionable act: By falsely telling Diprose that she was going to This article argues that Louth v Diprose is a troublesome precedent. the donee's unconscientious exploitation of the donor's impaired his judgement. conferring a benefit upon her. There needs to be a special disability evident to the other party such that it was unfair prima concurrent findings. impugned transaction in the circumstances in which he or she procured She also told the respondent that she had friends in Adelaide. Diprose was in a position of emotional dependence on Louth. in that party clearly being 'weak' in relation to the other party and It was the respondent who continued to seek her out. [2] [3] [4] Facts Solicitor Louis Donald Diprose (the plaintiff/respondent) was infatuated with Carol Mary Louth (the defendant/appellant), whom he had met in Launceston, Tasmania in 1981. Louth v Diprose (1992) 175 CLR 621 . was such as to put the appellant in a position of influence [re his actions], Copyright 2023 StudeerSnel B.V., Keizersgracht 424, 1016 GC Amsterdam, KVK: 56829787, BTW: NL852321363B01, Management Accounting (Kim Langfield-Smith; Helen Thorne; David Alan Smith; Ronald W. Hilton), Database Systems: Design Implementation and Management (Carlos Coronel; Steven Morris), Financial Institutions, Instruments and Markets (Viney; Michael McGrath; Christopher Viney), Company Accounting (Ken Leo; John Hoggett; John Sweeting; Jennie Radford), Il potere dei conflitti. The degree of his emotional dependence upon her and his susceptibility to her wishes is obvious on the evidence and was obvious to her.'. Full case name Commercial Bank of Australia Ltd v Amadio. - Led to the acceptance of his evidence in trial, which might have been His proposal of marriage was rejected. Further details of the facts between the parties are set out in the judgment of Justice Toohey. o Wilton v Farnworth the circumstances. The appeal was dismissed. At the end of the day, however, it is for the party impeaching the gift to show that it is the product of the donee's exploitative conduct. As such and as the authorities repeatedly acknowledge, they are findings which, unless some error is to be discerned, an appeal court must respect .', Their Honours considered (at para 14) that there was, 'no appealable error attending the trial judge's conclusions with respect to the relationship between the parties and the appellant's manipulation of it.'. His Honour then went on to outline the respondent's claim and the findings at trial and on appeal to the Full Court. He showered her with gifts and Donoghue v Stevenson = constraint v choice; Louth v Diprose = adversarial system, narrative (language) Relate themes together = access to justice, nature of law reconsidered . o Amadio made her feelings about Diprose quite clear, and that it was he who pursued the relationship, Copyright 2023 StudeerSnel B.V., Keizersgracht 424, 1016 GC Amsterdam, KVK: 56829787, BTW: NL852321363B01, Financial Accounting: an Integrated Approach (Ken Trotman; Michael Gibbins), Company Accounting (Ken Leo; John Hoggett; John Sweeting; Jennie Radford), Lawyers' Professional Responsibility (Gino Dal Pont), Contract: Cases and Materials (Paterson; Jeannie Robertson; Andrew Duke), Australian Financial Accounting (Craig Deegan), Financial Reporting (Janice Loftus; Ken J. Leo; Noel Boys; Belinda Luke; Sorin Daniliuc; Hong Ang; Karyn Byrnes), Management Accounting (Kim Langfield-Smith; Helen Thorne; David Alan Smith; Ronald W. Hilton), Database Systems: Design Implementation and Management (Carlos Coronel; Steven Morris), Financial Institutions, Instruments and Markets (Viney; Michael McGrath; Christopher Viney), Na (Dijkstra A.J. the donee, places the donor at a special disadvantage vis-a- Nor is there any basis for disturbing the findings that the relationship between the parties was one in which the respondent was in a position of "emotional dependence" on the appellant and that she was in a position to influence his decisions and actions.' his degree of infatuation (his proposal was that they would live together as man and She manipulated it to her advantage to influence the respondent to make the gift of the money to purchase the house. so that it is more inclusive listens to voices of minority groups etc Citation (s) (1983) 151 CLR 447. The required structure is: (i) facts of the case (200 words); (ii) the court's decision (200 words) and (iii) why this case is . Louth V Diprose Case Study. The intervention of equity is not merely to relieve the plaintiff from the consequences of his own foolishness. Their Honours noted that there were two questions raised by the appeal (para 2): 'is there an appealable error attending the conclusions of the trial judge as to the relationship of the parties and the appellant's manipulation of the respondent's infatuation?'. She had previously told the respondent that she had slashed her wrists, or attempted to do so, on two occasions in 1984 and had pointed out to him marks on her wrist which may well have been consistent with a slash. [para 4] The parties met at a party in Launceston in November 1981. Wilton, where the weaker party was clear, meant that the story had (para 10). Decision and reasoning ; Jager R. de; Koops Th. Louth v Diprose (1992) 175 CLR 621 Facts This case was about unconscionable conduct relating to the transfer of property by (Diprose) to (Louth). 'do those conclusions permit of equitable relief with respect to the gift? Diprose made a proposal in 1982, but it was turned down. relationship with a donee, that the donee exploited the disadvantage and that Marketing notes - covers all semester content, MAST10006 lecture slides 2019 s1 print version, 1112 weeks 1-12 notes - Summary Anatomy & Physiology for Health Professionals 2, AS 1668.1-2015 The use of Ventilation and Conditioning in Buildings, Bsbhrm 614 Contribute to strategic workforce planning, CHCDEV002 Analyse impacts of sociological factors on clients in community work and services - Final Assessment, CHCCDE003 Work within a community development framework - Final assessment, Week 2 - Attitudes, stereotyping and predjucie, 14449906 Andrew Assessment 2B Written reflection, Principles and Practice of Australian Law. 10 Report Document Comments Please sign inor registerto post comments. intervention of equity is required to prevent the other partys victimisation. This page is not available in other languages. In 1988 when their relationship deteriorated, the plaintiff asked the defendant to transfer the house into his name. vis the donee; But equally, while the appellant was content to accept the many benefits she received from the respondent, there can be no doubt that she made her position in the relationship quite clear. - The transaction involved a gift from the plaintiff/respondent who claimed to be under a special Ruling court High Court of Australia. economic substantiality which was abused to be financially manipulative the to enter into a contract which they would not have entered into had, o In the case of Louth v Diprose, the actual truth was never exposed He sent her love poems, gave her many gifts and paid her household bills from time time when she was at Adelaide. - Diprose lied about the re-transfer 6 times under oath shows the complications and nuances of this case. His Honour did not consider that the evidence supported that finding. unconscionable dealing may take a wide variety of forms and are not susceptible Rather, the 'equitable jurisdiction exists when one of the parties "suffers from some special disability or is placed in some special situation of disadvantage" [citing Amadio per Mason J at p 461]. Mr Volkhardt owned a house in Tranmere in which the appellant was living with her children and for which she paid a low rent. - E. the quarrel referred to actually involving physical/verbal violence Copyright 2023 StudeerSnel B.V., Keizersgracht 424, 1016 GC Amsterdam, KVK: 56829787, BTW: NL852321363B01, and, if this happened, she would commit suicide (thi, a man who was infatuated with a woman was under a special, disability and whether or not she used this to her advantage to g, evidence enabling the trial judge to estimate their characters and, gifts procured by unconscionable conduct ordin, the donee, places the donor at a special disadvant, Culture and Psychology (Matsumoto; David Matsumoto; Linda Juang), Company Accounting (Ken Leo; John Hoggett; John Sweeting; Jennie Radford), Management Accounting (Kim Langfield-Smith; Helen Thorne; David Alan Smith; Ronald W. Hilton), Auditing (Robyn Moroney; Fiona Campbell; Jane Hamilton; Valerie Warren), Contract: Cases and Materials (Paterson; Jeannie Robertson; Andrew Duke), Na (Dijkstra A.J. Shortly after the separation Mr Volkhardt said to the appellant, speaking of the house at Tranmere, that: "(M)aybe she should be paying more rent or maybe it would be a good idea to put her name down on the housing list because she couldn't assume she would live there forever". CBA emphasised age, limited English as special disability, Louth He showered her with gifts and at one time Louths story ended up working against her, as the evidence didnt Although the concept of unconscionability is wide, there is no 'general power to set aside bargains simply because they appear to be unfair, harsh or unconscionable' (para 37). Your case-note must conform to the structure set out in these instructions. He noted that the (para 3) 'key is to be found in the following passage from the judgment of King C.J. gifts procured by unconscionable conduct ordinarily arises from often should, be drawn that the exploitation was the effective cause of the gift Courts will set aside a contract or a gift which is entered into in circumstances which are unconscionable - where the person giving, has a vulnerability whi. The respondent tried to persuade her to stay in Launceston. The story, being so different and vague in terms of the Stories told by outsiders and the telling of counter-stories is seen as and, if this happened, she would commit suicide (this was largely 82. impact within this case) Louth lost on appeal and tried again this time in the High Court. The process of judicial adjudication is viewed not as the application She Intercourse took place shortly after their first meeting and again about eight months later. Legislation: - Crimes Act 1958 Section 322O - Personal Property Securities Act 2009 (cth) 4. Thus, the trial judge said, in the context of his "impressions of the witnesses who gave evidence", that the respondent was "a strange romantic character" with "a sustained infatuation for the (appellant)" and that much of his evidence was convincing but that his "demeanour was not such as to persuade me to accept evidence which I consider to be improbable or which is in conflict with other convincing evidence" And in the same context, his Honour said that he "formed the impression that the (appellant) was a calculating witness who was prepared to tailor her evidence in order to advance her case" . 'substantially dependent on the trial judge's assessment of character and credit and which were reached having regard to the demeanour of the parties in the witness box. His first marriage had ended in divorce and the final separation from his second wife was about to take place. Minority Judgment ; Philippens H.M.M.G. Diprose was 'utterly infatuated' with Louth. of property by a man (Diprose) to a woman (Louth) upon whom he was Louth). In setting this precedent, the court was aware of the potential for His Honour then referred to authorities on unconscionable conduct and to the trial judge's explicit findings of unconscientious exploitation by Louth. 'special disability' is reinforced by the language of 'weak' and - Case reinforced historical social constructs (i. patriarchy, power imbalance favouring men) Describes Appeal dismissed. Mr Volkhardt then contacted the respondent to say that the appellant did not wish to see him. (para 4). 00 Report Document Comments use a man for his money i. manipulate men for financial support) Diprose proposed in 1982 and was rejected. Appeal dismissed. Issues mechanical process this flexibility allows the common law to stay relevant to contemporary manipulation, yet his status was used to portray him as a more credible witness (compared to He showered her with gifts and at one time proposed to her; she refused. January 27, 2020. Over the years he composed many poems which he called "The Mary Poems". transaction was there a legal transaction between Louth HCA Appeal from the Supreme Court of South Australia, Full Court. Nonetheless, we have to accept and Louth v Diprose was quite unimpressive. Louth v Diprose, [1] is an Australian contract law and equity case, in which unconscionable conduct is considered. Cases Prep:-CONSULT EXAMPLE IN 'EXAM PREP PLANNING' DOC-How flexibility is bad, how constraint is good/bad-Donoghue v Stevenson = constraint v choice-Louth v Diprose = adversarial system, narrative (language)-Relate themes together = access to justice, nature of law reconsidered-Description notes: Legal independence, Mabo-Revisit McBain-Critically examine: the fact that the law is both . Louth v Diprose Case Summary University University of Wollongong Course Foundations of Law (LLB1100) 242 Documents Academic year:2021/2022 Listed bookPrinciples and Practice of Australian Law Helpful? It is obvious that feelings were much stronger on the respondent's side. Diprose meant to give L the house, it was a gift, it was never meant to be reimbursed, Tran Scripts (transcript of the evidence), He was at an emotional disadvantage but an economic advantage, Emotional dependency of Diprose disability His Honour considered the trial judge's finding of unconscionable conduct was 'inevitable and plainly correct' (para 14). The respondent told the appellant he wanted her to transfer the Tranmere house to him and to pay some rent for her occupation of it. Louth lost on appeal and tried again this time in the High During a relationship which continued for about seven years, intercourse took place on those two occasions only. Diprose was infatuated with Louth. - Trial at the Supreme Court of South Australia where Diprose succeeded, The purportedly limited presentation of the appellant's case has been noted.[10]. - He is so infatuated with Louth that he lost his mind ; Jager R. de; Koops Th. The emphasis on narrative rather than 'facts' or 'rules' places legal At first the appellant was in a very bright mood but later her mood changed suddenly. - This case demonstrates the nuances of legal system can be seen from the amendments ma de to existing legislation in the r elevant area. The reason was that she was in straitened financial circumstances following the breakdown of her marriage and she hoped for help from her sister and her sister's husband, Mr and Mrs Volkhardt. Louth v Diprose (1992) 175 CLR 621 Instructions: You must write a case-note on one of the five following cases. - Her intentions were constantly in question (was leaving her bills lying around 'emotionally dependent'. M.F.M. Majority Judgment But it does not follow that he was emotionally dependent upon her in any relevant legal sense ', Justice Peter Heerey, 'Truth, Lies and Sereotype: Stories of Mary and Louis' (1996) 1(3) Newcastle Law Review 1 , Samantha Hepburn, 'Equity & infatuation' (1993) 18(5)Alternative Law Journal208 , Brooke Murphy, 'Neurodivergent women in 'clouded judgment' unconscionability cases - an intersectional feminist perspective' (2018) 39Adelaide Law Review37 , Dianne Otto, 'A Barren Future? Court: High Court, Procedural History: On this basis, Louth's conduct was unconscionable and Diprose was entitled to equitable relief. of that evidence differ from story to story It was, however, 'incumbent on the respondent to bring himself within the general principle.' Describes Louth v Diprose; [1992] HCA 61 - Louth v Diprose (02 December 1992); [1992] HCA 61 (02 December 1992) (Mason CJ, Brennan, Deane, Dawson, Toohey, Gaudron and McHugh JJ); 175 CLR 621; 110 ALR 1 BarNet Jade Telstra Corp v Treloar (2000) FCA 1171" The: o Ratio of decisions of o Higher courts in the o Same hierarchy are binding on all lower courts in that hierarchy. Describes Later he called at her home but a man, whom the respondent had known from Tasmania, answered the door. Diprose as: predator, dangerous, manipulator, wealthy, stalker, Mary Louth is on single mother benefits archetypal assumptions which may have been of the established principles, Legal Issues Practice of Australian Law (Thomson Reuters, 4th ed, 2020) p, Judicial discretion and interpretation means that the application of general rules is not a involve making an issue about the inequality so there was no Louis Diprose (a solicitor twice divorced) became friends with Carol Louth, initially in Tasmania. Diprose was infatuated with Louth. the power disparity between them obvious. LLB1110 Case Summary - Louth v Diprose (1992) In-depth summary of the case (involving fact summary, key excerpts, le. The respondent made many gifts to the appellant, some of jewellery and others of a less personal nature such as a television set and a washing-machine. Justice King held that Diprose was beneficially swindle him of his money. been demonstrated to have influence over the developm ent of legislation and the. Material Facts: The facts of the case involve appellant (Louth) and respondent (Diprose). Solicitor Louis Donald Diprose (the plaintiff/respondent) was infatuated with Carol Mary Louth (the defendant/appellant), whom he had met in Launceston, Tasmania in 1981. intentional and calculated manipulation) The appellant said she could not go out with him because she had met another man. one party to a relationship on the mind of the other whereby the other disposes unrequited love harmless adjectives which paint him as a romantic rather than an to believe that she required a house defendant, and diprose. [para 11] Mr Volkhardt's remark was obviously the catalyst for the discussions between the appellant and the respondent in May 1985. When asked for restitution she refused. At the trial in the Supreme Court of South Australia, the court of first instance, the plaintiff won, with King CJ holding that for the defendant to retain the house and land would be unconscionable and thus the plaintiff was beneficially entitled to the land. Justice Dawson, Gaudron and Mchugh: Reasoning: Their Honours noted that there were two questions raised by the The respondent continued to telephone the appellant and to call on her. In May 1985 Diprose agreed to buy the house for Louth for $58,000 and, at her insistence, purchased it in her name.