Crown Melbourne Limited v Cosmopolitan Hotel (Vic) Pty Ltd [2016] HCA 26

HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

FRENCH CJ, KIEFEL, BELL, GAGELER, KEANE, NETTLE AND GORDON JJ

CROWN MELBOURNE LIMITED APPELLANT

AND

COSMOPOLITAN HOTEL (VIC) PTY LTD & ANOR RESPONDENTS

Crown Melbourne Limited v Cosmopolitan Hotel (Vic) Pty Ltd [2016] HCA 26 20 July 2016 M253/2015

ORDER

1. Appeal allowed with costs.

2. Set aside orders 2 to 6 of the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of Victoria made on 8 April 2015, and in their place order that the appeal to that Court be dismissed with costs.

3. Special leave to cross-appeal granted, limited to ground 4 of the Notice of Cross‑Appeal dated 24 December 2015.

4. Cross-appeal dismissed with costs.

On appeal from the Supreme Court of Victoria

Representation

B W Walker SC with N D Hopkins QC for the appellant (instructed by Minter Ellison Lawyers)

M R Pearce SC with R S Hay QC for the respondents (instructed by Mills Oakley Lawyers)

Notice: This copy of the Court's Reasons for Judgment is subject to formal revision prior to publication in the Commonwealth Law Reports.

CATCHWORDS

Crown Melbourne Limited v Cosmopolitan Hotel (Vic) Pty Ltd

Contract – Collateral contract – Where tenants held five year leases under which they operated two restaurants – Where clause of leases required landlord to give notice that leases were to be renewed or continued or the premises were to be vacated – Where in course of negotiations for further leases landlord made statement to tenants that they would be "looked after at renewal time" – Where landlord required tenants to vacate premises on expiration of leases – Whether statement gave rise to collateral contract – Whether statement promissory in nature – Whether obligation uncertain.

Estoppel – Whether statement to tenants that they would be "looked after at renewal time" could give rise to estoppel – Whether statement capable of conveying to reasonable person that tenants would be offered further lease – Whether expectation acted upon by tenants.