Alanbert Pty Ltd v Bulevi Pty Ltd [2000] NSWSC 470

Alanbert Pty Ltd v Bulevi Pty Ltd [2000] NSWSC 470

Special condition N is interpreted as obliging the purchasers, on request, to grant to the plaintiff after transfer of land a second mortgage to secure the balance of the purchase price, provided such mortgage presents no impediments to the first mortgage. The August 1995 deed did not abrogate this right, and the existence of a second mortgage at this stage does not impede the first mortgage. Therefore, the plaintiff is entitled to a second mortgage over the land (Lot 13) in appropriate terms.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
26 May 2000
Procedural Posture
Civil / Equity Division Judgment on Entitlement to Second Mortgage
Outcome
Plaintiff is entitled to a second mortgage over the balance of subject land.
Legal Topics
['offer and Acceptance' 'specific Performance' 'vagueness and Uncertainty in Contract Terms' 'mortgages' 'sale of Land']
['contracts' 'property Law' 'equity'] ['offer and Acceptance' 'specific Performance' 'vagueness and Uncertainty in Contract Terms' 'mortgages' 'sale of Land']

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

Civil / Equity Division Judgment on Entitlement to Second Mortgage

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether special condition N of the March 1994 contracts entitles the plaintiff to a second mortgage over the land' "Whether the subsequent August 1995 deed abrogated the plaintiff's right to a second mortgage" 'Whether the proviso to special condition N defeated or impeded the plaintiff’s right to a second mortgage']

Ratio Decidendi

Special condition N is interpreted as obliging the purchasers, on request, to grant to the plaintiff after transfer of land a second mortgage to secure the balance of the purchase price, provided such mortgage presents no impediments to the first mortgage. The August 1995 deed did not abrogate this right, and the existence of a second mortgage at this stage does not impede the first mortgage. Therefore, the plaintiff is entitled to a second mortgage over the land (Lot 13) in appropriate terms.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff is entitled to a second mortgage over the balance of subject land.

Orders

  • ['Direct short minutes to be brought in to give effect to the judgment and to address issues of outstanding mortgages and caveats; directions for determination of all outstanding questions relating to costs']