Adelaide real estate agent Zane Pitt wins appeal against unconscionable conduct Supreme Court decision

An Adelaide real estate agent has won an appeal of a judgement that he had engaged in unconscionable conduct by buying a pensioner's house below its true value. Key points: An Adelaide pensioner sold his home for $175,000 to a real estate agent His daughter subdivided and sold the two new houses on the property for $765,000 The Supreme Court has ruled the purchase process was not unconscionable The South Australian Supreme Court's decision in favour of Zane Anthony Pitt relied on a High Court judgement from 2019 that narrowed the meaning of unconscionable conduct. No 'special disadvantage' established In the judgement handed down on Friday, justices Samuel Doyle, Mark Livesey and Chris Bleby found Auxiliary Justice Michael David should not have overturned the magistrate's decision because the commissioner "did not establish special disadvantage" on the part of Mr Hartwig and that it had not been established that Mr Pitt acted "unconscionably". They said Mr Pitt was in a better bargaining position than Mr Hartwig, but the latter did not have a "special disadvantage" that affected his ability to protect his own interests.