High Court of Australia
$
IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA ©
a STEVERS
—— BDER.AND ANOTHER
ORIGINAL
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
ADELAIDE REGISTRY FILED
hy 4 JAM 1986
Fees Paid...
Judgment delivered at_SYDNEY _ on_. THURSDAY, 7th JANUARY, 1965
'A.C. Brooks, Government Printer, Melbourne €.7639/60
age
SIEVERS
EDER AND ANOTHER ORDER
Appeal dismissed with costs.
JUDGMENT
SIEVERS
Ve
EDER AND ANOTHER
KITTO J. RT. OWEN J.
SIEVERS
Ve
EDER_AND ANOTHER
The appellant was one of three defendants in an action brought by the respondents in the Supreme Court of South Australia. He was the manager of a firm of land agents, consisting of two partners named Lumsden and Kean, which carried on business in Adelaide and which was acting as agent for a Mr. and Mrs. Baluta who wished to sell a residential property of which they were the owners. The respondents, who are husband and wife, agreed to buy the property and on 25th February 1958 the parties signed a contract of sale. The purchase price was £5,750 which was to be paid, as to £350 as a deposit on the signing of the contract; of the balance £3,400 was to be paid "on date of settlement and vacant possession to be secured by way of first mortgage from a finance company at an interest rate of 10% per annum to be adjusted yearly and repayable by monthly instalments of £38.10.0 including interest", and the remaining £2,000 was "to be carried as a second mortgage by the vendors to be repaid by monthly instalments of not less than £14 including interest at a rate of 7% per annum to be adjusted quarterly and to be paid in full within a period of five years",
The respondents paid the deposit but later told the appellant that they did not wish to complete the purchase. The Balutas were about to go abroad and the appellant pressed the respondents to carry out the contract, saying that he would be able to re-sell the property on their behalf and without loss to them. AS a result, a written agreement dated 7th May 1958 was drawn up by a solicitor acting for the respondents and signed by them and by the appellant who purported to sign for
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate