Supreme Court of New South Wales

Thomas Boga v 15 Glenburnie Rd Pty Ltd

2025/00377168

Date Party Submission

4/11/25;

20/2/26

Appellant Notice of Appeal (PDF, 2.7 MB)

12/12/25;

20/2/26

Appellant Submissions (PDF, 279.9 KB)
2/2/26 Respondent Submissions (PDF, 3.6 MB)
20/2/26 Appellant Reply (PDF, 1.1 MB)
20/2/26 Respondent Certification for Publication (PDF, 27.2 KB)

CONTRACT – this is a suit brought by Mr Thomas Boga to recover monies lent to 15 Glenburnie Rd Pty Ltd (15 Glenburnie), which were guaranteed by Mr Ahmad Abdulkader Sakr, pursuant to a deed entered into between the parties on around 28 October 2019 (the Deed) – there is no dispute as to the existence of the Deed, under which Mr Boga promised to lend the sum of $1.9 million to 15 Glenburnie – Mr Boga and Mr Sakr are known to each other, and have a history of commercial dealings concerning the purchase and development of property – Mr Sakr is the sole director of 15 Glenburnie – Mr Boga alleged that 15 Glenburnie had only made a single repayment of $700,000 on 29 December 2020, and sought the repayment of the balance of the loan (being $1.2 million) as well as interest – 15 Glenburnie and Mr Sakr disputed that only a single repayment had taken place, and particularised approximately 20 payments over December 2019 to March 2021 that had been made with respect to the loan, totalling approximately $1.95 million – the primary judge held that: (1) the advances made by Mr Boga to Mr Sakr in relation to the loan agreement are in the sum of $2,010,000; (2) the repayments made by Mr Sakr to Mr Boga in relation to the loan agreement are in the sum of $1,843,000; (3) the balance owing to Mr Boga by Sakr is in the sum of $167,000 plus interest – whether the primary judge was in error when her Honour concluded that on or around 27 December 2019, $450,000 was not advanced to the first respondent as a loan – whether the primary judge was in error when her Honour concluded that on or around 10 November 2020, $100,000 was not advanced to the first respondent as a loan – whether the primary judge was in error when her Honour concluded that on or around 19 July 2021, $150,000 was not advanced to the first respondent as a loan.

Decision under appeal

Last updated:

Counsel

Appellant:

G George

Respondent:  

I Chatterjee