Codelfa Construction Pty Ltd v State Rail Authority of NSW information
Judgement of the High Court of Australia
Codelfa Construction Pty Ltd v State Rail Authority of NSW
Court
High Court of Australia
Decided
11 May 1982
Citations
[1982] HCA 24, (1982) 149 CLR 337
Case history
Appealed from
New South Wales Court of Appeal
Subsequent actions
[1982] HCA 51, (1982) 150 CLR 29
Case opinions
(5:0) There was no implied term dealing with restraint by injunction (4:1) The contract was frustrated because of the injunction (Brennan J dissenting)
Majority
Mason, Stephen, Aickin & Wilson JJ
Concur/dissent
Brennan J
Codelfa Construction Pty Ltd v State Rail Authority of New South Wales,[1] ("Codelfa") is a widely cited Australian contract law case,[2] which serves as authority for the modern approach to contractual construction.[3] The case greatly influenced the development of the Eastern Suburbs railway line. In terms of contract law, the case addresses questions of frustration, construction and the parol evidence rule. The case diverged from the well established English approach regarding the use of extrinsic evidence in contractual interpretation.[4][5]
^Codelfa Construction Pty Ltd v State Rail Authority of NSW [1982] HCA 24, (1982) 149 CLR 337 (11 May 1982), High Court.
^Codelfa Construction Pty Ltd v State Rail Authority of NSWLawCite search
^McLauchlan, David, The Contract that Neither Party Intends (2012) 29 Journal of Contract Law 26 SSRN 2112116
^Investors Compensation Scheme Ltd v West Bromwich Building Society [1997] UKHL 28, [1998] 1 All ER 98, House of Lords (UK).
^Catterwell, Ryan, The "indirect" Use of Evidence of Prior Negotiations and the Parties' Intentions in Contractual Construction: Part of the Surrounding Circumstances (2012) 29 Journal of Contract Law 183.
and 9 Related for: Codelfa Construction Pty Ltd v State Rail Authority of NSW information
CodelfaConstructionPtyLtdvStateRailAuthorityof New South Wales, ("Codelfa") is a widely cited Australian contract law case, which serves as authority...
Radcliffe's test was approved by the High Court of Australia in CodelfaConstructionPtyLtdvStateRailAuthorityofNSW. English contract law Frustration in English...
prosecution. Leduc v Ward Pym v Campbell [1856]. Henderson v Arthur [1907] CA CodelfaConstructionPtyLtdvStateRailAuthorityofNSW [1982] HCA 24, (1982)...
"Love v Commonwealth of Australia; Thoms v Commonwealth of Australia [2020] HCA 3 - Judgment Summary" (PDF). High Court of Australia. Commonwealth of Australia...
Global Information