Melic Pty Ltd v Lainson [2005] NSWSC 711

New South Wales Supreme Court

CITATION : Melic Pty Ltd v Lainson [2005] NSWSC 711

HEARING DATE(S) : 6 & 28 June 2005

JUDGMENT DATE : 14 July 2005

JURISDICTION : Equity

JUDGMENT OF : Hamilton J

DECISION : On true construction of contract purchaser not entitled to terminate by reason of supervening order under s 66G of Conveyancing Act 1919. Vendor entitled to terminate for non performance and to damages. Return of deposit refused.

CATCHWORDS : CONVEYANCING [76] - Relationship of vendor and purchaser - Breach of contract - Deposit - Recovery or forfeiture - Other cases - Recovery of deposit - Statutory power to order - Circumstances in which order refused - INTERPRETATION [26] - Admissibility of extrinsic evidence in relation to instruments - Matters particularly relating to contract - In general - Relevant principles - Surrounding circumstances in aid of interpretation.

LEGISLATION CITED : Conveyancing Act 1919 ss 55(1), 55(2A) & 66G

Austin v Sheldon [1974] 2 NSWLR 661 Brooks v NSW Grains Board (2002) Aust Contract Reports 90-155; [2002] NSWSC 1049 Codelfa Construction Proprietary Limited v State Rail Authority of New South Wales (1982) 149 CLR 337 Eighth SRJ Pty Ltd v Merity (1997) 7 BPR 15,189 CASES CITED : Havyn Pty Ltd v Webster [2005] NSWCA 182 Investors Compensation Scheme Ltd v West Bromwich Building Society [1998] 1 WLR 896 Lucas & Tait (Investments) Pty Ltd v Victoria Securities Ltd [1973] 2 NSWLR 268 Romanos v Pentagold Investments Pty Limited (2003) 217 CLR 367 Royal Botanic Gardens and Domain Trust v South Sydney City Council (2002) 76 ALJR 436