Ramm Investments Pty Ltd v Nguyen [2017] NSWSC 1742

Ramm Investments Pty Ltd v Nguyen [2017] NSWSC 1742

The plaintiffs acted reasonably in commencing proceedings for specific performance after the defendants failed to complete the slab within the contractual timeframe, failed to provide timely satisfactory responses to repeated demands, and were on notice of the plaintiffs' concerns. It was not necessary for the plaintiffs to make time of the essence before suing for specific performance. The plaintiffs' separate breach of cl 4 did not excuse the defendants' apparent breach and did not make the plaintiffs' conduct unreasonable for costs purposes. Because there was a marked difference between the reasonableness of the plaintiffs' conduct and the unreasonableness of the defendants' conduct,...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
13 December 2017
Procedural Posture
Costs Application in Proceedings for Specific Performance of Heads of Agreement / Proceedings Resolved by Agreement Except as to Costs
Outcome
Defendants ordered to pay the plaintiffs' costs; proceedings otherwise dismissed by consent.
Legal Topics
['costs After Proceedings Resolved Without Trial' 'specific Performance' 'reasonable Endeavours Obligation' 'time for Performance of Contract' 'heads of Agreement Following Mediation']
['costs' 'contract Law' 'equity'] ['costs After Proceedings Resolved Without Trial' 'specific Performance' 'reasonable Endeavours Obligation' 'time for Performance of Contract' 'heads of Agreement Following Mediation']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Costs Application in Proceedings for Specific Performance of Heads of Agreement / Proceedings Resolved by Agreement Except as to Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the defendants should pay the plaintiffs' costs where the proceedings were resolved by agreement before determination on the merits." 'Whether the plaintiffs were required to make time of the essence before suing for specific performance of cl 1 of the heads of agreement.' "Whether the plaintiffs' breach of cl 4 of the heads of agreement affected their entitlement to costs." "Whether there was a marked difference in the reasonableness of the parties' conduct sufficient to justify a costs order."]

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiffs acted reasonably in commencing proceedings for specific performance after the defendants failed to complete the slab within the contractual timeframe, failed to provide timely satisfactory responses to repeated demands, and were on notice of the plaintiffs' concerns. It was not necessary for the plaintiffs to make time of the essence before suing for specific performance. The plaintiffs' separate breach of cl 4 did not excuse the defendants' apparent breach and did not make the plaintiffs' conduct unreasonable for costs purposes. Because there was a marked difference between the reasonableness of the plaintiffs' conduct and the unreasonableness of the defendants' conduct,...

Court Disposition

Defendants ordered to pay the plaintiffs' costs; proceedings otherwise dismissed by consent.

Orders

  • ["Order the defendants to pay the plaintiffs' costs of the proceedings." 'By consent, order that the proceedings be otherwise dismissed.']