Skip to Content

Decisions of the Superior Courts of New South Wales, 1788-1899

Ex parte Whickers [1839] NSWSupC 52

injunction - Balmain estate - land law, title - land law, waste - lunacy

Supreme Court of New South Wales

Dowling C.J., Willis and Stephen JJ, in banco, 22 June 1839

Source: Sydney Herald, 24 June 1839

Ex Parte Gilchrist. -- The Attorney-General moved for a writ of injunction, restraining Mr. Parbury from selling the Balmain Estate.  The petition of Mr. Gilchrist, at whose instance the application was made, stated that Mr. John Bothwick Gilchrist, who is at present resident in England, is insane, but in the year 1833, granted a power of attorney in favor of Mr. Parbury, for the purpose of recovering the land from Mr. R. W. Loane, in whose possession it was.  The land has been recovered, and Mr. Parbury has sold part of it, and has advertised the remainder for sale on the 24th instant.  The applicant is nephew and next of kin to the lunatic, and considering there is no occasion for the sale made the application for the purpose of preventing waste.

There was no Bill filed in the case which is the more regular mo[d]e, and the Court declined granting the injunction; but if a Bill were on the file at eight o'clock this morning, one of the Judges would attend for the purpose of granting it.


Dowling C.J.,  Willis and Stephen JJ, 13 July 1839

Source: Sydney Herald, 17 July 1839 [1]

Saturday. -- Before the three Judges.  In Banco.

Ex parte, Whickers. -- The Attorney General applied for an injunction, restraining the sale of the Balmain Estate.  It appeared from the bill which had been filed, and the affidavit of Mr. Gilchrist Whickers, that Mr. J. B. Gilchrist, formerly Professor of Hindustani at Bengal, is a person of weak mind, but in 1831, a power of attorney was granted by him to Mr. Parbury for the purpose of recovering possession of the Balmain Estate, which he did, and subsequently sold three hundred and twenty acres of it, and has now advertised the remainder.  The application was made upon the ground, first, that the power of attorney was only for a particular purpose, and that there is no occasion for the sale.  The Court granted an order to restrain the sale until Mr. Parbury answers the allegations in the bill.



[1] See also Sydney Gazette, 18 July 1839; Australian, 18 July 1839

Published by the Division of Law, Macquarie University