Comco Constructions Pty Ltd v Leisure Holdings Australia Pty Ltd [1986] FCA 209

Comco Constructions Pty Ltd v Leisure Holdings Australia Pty Ltd [1986] FCA 209

A binding contract was formed by mutual understanding and appointment of Comco as builder, evidenced by conduct and communications, despite no final price being established or written agreement signed. Leisure breached the contract by appointing another builder after Comco had part performed the agreement and was entitled to damages including loss of potential profit.

Parties
Applicant: COMCO Constructions Pty. Ltd.; Respondent: Leisure Holdings Australia Pty. Ltd.
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
30 May 1986
Procedural Posture
Civil / Judgment
Outcome
Judgment for the applicant
Legal Topics
Building Contracts, Contract Formation, Course of Dealing, Part Performance, Appointment of Builder, Breach of Contract, Assessment of Damages, Loss of Potential Profit, Misleading Conduct
Contract Law Trade Practices Building Contracts Contract Formation Course of Dealing Part Performance Appointment of Builder Breach of Contract +3 more

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 5 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 14
Sign in to unlock

Parties

COMCO Constructions Pty. Ltd.

Applicant

Leisure Holdings Australia Pty. Ltd.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a binding contract was formed between the parties for the construction of Peachtree project
  2. 2 Whether breach of contract occurred when Leisure Holdings appointed another builder
  3. 3 Assessment of damages including loss of potential profit

Ratio Decidendi

A binding contract was formed by mutual understanding and appointment of Comco as builder, evidenced by conduct and communications, despite no final price being established or written agreement signed. Leisure breached the contract by appointing another builder after Comco had part performed the agreement and was entitled to damages including loss of potential profit.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the applicant

Orders

  • Judgment for the applicant in the sum of $54,675.07 plus costs to be taxed