Statutory fraud or not?
Dixon, William M. (2002) Statutory fraud or not? The Queensland Lawyer, 23(2), pp. 35-36.
The possibility of fraud lurks easily in the context of a mortgage transaction (as recently exemplified by the decision of the Queensland Court of Appeal in Young v Hoger  QCA 461). A relatively novel issue, involving an allegation of fraudulent behaviour, arose for consideration by Justice Wilson in Unic v Quartermain Holdings Pty Ltd  QSC 403
Impact and interest:
Citation countsare sourced monthly fromand citation databases.
These databases contain citations from different subsets of available publications and different time periods and thus the citation count from each is usually different. Some works are not in either database and no count is displayed. Scopus includes citations from articles published in 1996 onwards, and Web of Science® generally from 1980 onwards.
Citations counts from theindexing service can be viewed at the linked Google Scholar™ search.
Full-text downloadsdisplays the total number of times this work’s files (e.g., a PDF) have been downloaded from QUT ePrints as well as the number of downloads in the previous 365 days. The count includes downloads for all files if a work has more than one.
|Item Type:||Journal Article|
|Keywords:||Property Law, mortgage transaction, fraudulent behaviour|
|Subjects:||Australian and New Zealand Standard Research Classification > LAW AND LEGAL STUDIES (180000) > LAW (180100) > Property Law (excl. Intellectual Property Law) (180124)|
|Divisions:||Current > QUT Faculties and Divisions > Faculty of Law|
|Copyright Owner:||Copyright 2002 Lawbook Company/Thomson Legal & Regulatory|
|Deposited On:||07 Jul 2011 08:18|
|Last Modified:||10 Jul 2011 12:57|
Repository Staff Only: item control page