Queensland Judgments
Jeppesons Road P/L v Di Domenico & Anor
[2005] QCA 391 (05/3521) Brisb McMurdo P Keane JA Douglas J 21/10/2005
Catchwords
CONTRACT - GENERAL CONTRACTUAL PRINCIPLES - CONSTRUCTION AND INTERPRETATION OF CONTRACTS - OTHER MATTERS - where the appellant and the respondents had entered into two interdependent contracts for the sale of land - where one parcel of land included a tenanted caravan park - where each contract was in the standard form approved by the Real Estate Institute of Queensland and the Queensland Law Society - where cl 5.3 of each contract provided that, among other things, the vendor would deliver to the purchaser, in exchange for the purchase price, a notice to each tenant advising of the sale in "the form required by law" - whether the learned trial judge was right to conclude that notice in "the form required by law" was notice in the form required by s 148(1)(b) Residential Tenancies Act 1994 (Qld)
CONTRACT - GENERAL CONTRACTUAL PRINCIPLES - DISCHARGE, BREACH AND DEFENCES TO ACTION FOR BREACH - ELECTION AND RECISSION - LOSS OR WAIVER OF RIGHT TO RESCIND - where the parties had nominated a specific date and time for settlement - where the appellant's representative was late arriving at the settlement venue - where the respondent's solicitor telephoned the appellant's solicitor on expiration of the deadline and purported to terminate the contract - where the respondent's solicitors were not in a position to hand over the notices required by cl 5.3 of the contracts of sale at the time when they purported to terminate those contracts - whether a right to rescind arises when a party is only in a position to perform those obligations under a contract of sale that can be seen to be "essential" - whether, despite the respondent's admitted lack of the necessary notices, it could still be said that the respondents were ready, willing and able to perform their contractual obligations at the time they purported to terminate the contracts for the appellant's breach - whether it made any difference that the respondents were in a position to obtain the necessary notices within a short time had they been called upon to perform in accordance with their contractual obligations - whether substantial compliance with concurrent and interdependent obligations is enough to found a right to rescind
