Reed v Sheehan [1982] FCA 2

Reed v Sheehan [1982] FCA 2

The late payments by the respondent, measured by the substituted arrangement, did not constitute breaches barring exercise of the option. Even if they did, the licensors' conduct and representations established an estoppel preventing them from relying on late payments to defeat the respondent’s exercise of the...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Appellant: Allen Reed; Appellant: Yvonne Reed; Respondent: James Lawrence Sheehan
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 January 1982
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Option to Purchase, Estoppel, Variation of Contract, Specific Performance
Contract Law Option to Purchase Estoppel Variation of Contract Specific Performance

Source-derived case record

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 6 Authorities cited 29 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Allen Reed

Appellant

Yvonne Reed

Appellant

James Lawrence Sheehan

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether late periodical payments under a licence agreement prevented valid exercise of an option to purchase
  2. 2 Whether licensors were estopped by conduct from relying on late payments to defeat the option exercise

Ratio Decidendi

The late payments by the respondent, measured by the substituted arrangement, did not constitute breaches barring exercise of the option. Even if they did, the licensors' conduct and representations established an estoppel preventing them from relying on late payments to defeat the respondent’s exercise of the option. Therefore, the respondent validly exercised the option and the agreement for sale was enforceable.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed

Orders

  • The appeal be allowed.
  • The order of the Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory be set aside.