Hewitt v Debus [2004] NSWCA 54

Reported Decision : 59 NSWLR 617

New South Wales Court of Appeal

CITATION : Hewitt v Debus [2004] NSWCA 54 HEARING DATE(S) : 11 November 2003 JUDGMENT DATE : 12 March 2004

JUDGMENT OF : Meagher JA at 1; Giles JA at 13; McColl JA at 101 DECISION : By majority: (1) Grant leave to appeal; (2) Direct that the notice of appeal be filed within seven days; (3) Dismiss the appeal; (4) Order that the claimant/appellant pay the costs of the opponent/respondent.

CATCHWORDS : Vendor and purchaser - contractual right to terminate if default by purchaser - termination - question at trial whether time of the essence - held it was not so termination ineffective - question on appeal whether inquiry into time being of the essence excluded - appellant relied on Honner v Ashton (1979) 1 BPR 97049 - by majority, held inquiry not excluded - necessary to consider application of s 13 of Conveyancing Act 1919 - parties had not litigated application of s 13 - can not decide case on a basis not litigated. Australian and New Zealand Banking Group Ltd v Burgess (Underwood J, 30 September 1994, unreported); Balog v Crestani (1975) 132 CLR 289; Brien v Dwyer (1978) 141 CLR 378; Canning v Temby (1906) 3 CLR 419; Carolan v AMF Bowling Pty Ltd (CA, 16 November 1995, unreported); Casinos Australia International (Christmas Island) Pty Ltd v Christmas Island Desert Pty Ltd (Owen J, 16 December 1998, unreported); Goffin v Houlder (1920) 90 LJ Ch 488; Holland v Wiltshire (1954) 90 CLR 409; Honner v Ashton (1979) 1 BPR 97049; Kassem v Colonial Mutual [2001] NSWCA 38; Legione v Hateley (1983) 152 CLR 406; CASES CITED : Louinder v Leis (1982) 149 CLR 509; McDonald v Dennys Lascelles Ltd (1933) 48 CLR 457; Neeta (Epping) Pty Ltd v Phillips (1974) 131 CLR 286; Raineri v Miles [1981] AC 1050; Smith v Hamilton [1951] 1 Ch 174; Stern v McArthur (1988) 165 CLR 489; Stickney v Keeble (1915) AC 386; Tanwar Enterprises Pty Ltd v Cauchi (2003) 77 ALJR 1853; Tilley v Thomas (1867) LR 3 Ch A 61; Thomas v Monaghan (1975) 1 NZLR 1 cl 10; United Scientific Holdings Ltd v Burnley Borough Council (1978) AC 904; Wacal Investments Pty Ltd v Hurley (1992) 1 Qd R 455; PARTIES : Melissa Anne Hewitt - Claimant Catherine Debus - Opponent FILE NUMBER(S) : CA CA 40257/03 COUNSEL : T Lynch - Claimant M J Stevens - Opponent SOLICITORS : Ellis Baxter, Murwillumbah - Claimant Abbott Tout - Opponent