NSW Caselaw
Court of Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: J&Z Holding (Aust) Pty Ltd v Vitti Pty Ltd [2024] NSWCA 2 Hearing dates: 23 August 2023 Date of orders: 30 January 2024 Decision date: 30 January 2024 Before: Payne JA at [1]; Kirk JA at [2]; Griffiths AJA at [3] Decision: The appeal is dismissed, with costs. Catchwords: CONTRACTS — Construction — Principles –Significance of poor drafting – whether a sum payable under a contract should be characterised as a "conventional deposit", repayable in the event of the vendors' default and recoverable in a claim for restitution, or as an option fee that became and remained the property of the grantor Cases Cited: Amnico Holdings Ltd v Griese [2016] 2 Qd R 512 Blanco v Wan [2021] NSWSC 273; (2021) 20 BPR 41,223 BP7 Pty Ltd v Gavancorp Pty Ltd (2021) 104 NSWLR 359; [2021] NSWSC 265 CCP Australian Airships Ltd v Primus Telecommunications Pty Ltd [2004] VSCA 232; (2005) ASAL 55-139 Iannello v Sharpe (2007) 69 NSWLR 452; [2007] NSWCA 61 J&Z Holding (Aust) Pty Ltd v Vitti Pty Ltd [2022] NSWSC 1718 Kazacos v Shuangling International Development Pty Ltd [2016] NSWSC 1504; 18 BPR 36,353 Luu v Sovereign Developments Pty Ltd [2006] NSWCA 40; (2006) 12 BPR 23,629 Manufacturers House Pty Limited v Ashington No 147 Pty Limited [2005] NSWSC 767; (2005) 12 BPR 23,913 Manufacturers House Pty Limited v Ashington No 147 Pty Limited [2005] NSWSC 767; (2005) 12 BPR 23,913 McDonald v Dennys Lascelles Ltd (1933) 48 CLR 457; [1933] HCA 25 Newlander Development Pty Ltd v Jung Kyun Han [2023] QSC 94 O'Dea v Allstates Leasing System (WA) Pty Ltd (1983) 152 CLR 359; [1983] HCA 3 S&C Nicola Pty Ltd v Peter Holmes Investment Pty Ltd (2022) 108 NSWLR 165; [2022] NSWCA 72 Seven Cable Television Pty Ltd v Telstra Corp Ltd [2000] FCA 350 Workers Trust & Merchant Bank Ltd v Dojap Investments Ltd [1993] AC 573 Category: Principal judgment Parties: J&Z Holding (Aust) Pty Ltd (Appellant) Vitti Pty Ltd (First Respondent) Michael Patrick Hannah (Second Respondent) Janet Lee Santwire (Third Respondent) Representation: Counsel: M Condon SC (Appellant) R Angyal SC (Respondents)
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