GOLDMASTER HOMES P/L & ANOR v JOHNSON & ORS [2004] NSWCA 144

GOLDMASTER HOMES P/L & ANOR v JOHNSON & ORS [2004] NSWCA 144

The court found that there was no concluded contract for a right of first refusal over the land. Even if such a right existed, the opportunity to purchase was genuinely given to the appellants, who refused on the grounds that the price was too high, thereby discharging any obligation. The court affirmed the trial judge’s findings and dismissed the appeal with costs.

Parties
Appellant: Goldmaster Homes Pty Ltd; Appellant: Rocky Scarcella; Respondent: Keith Norman Johnson; Respondent: Johnson & Johnson Real Estate Pty Ltd; Respondent: Hills Development Corporation Pty Ltd
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
04 June 2004
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Final Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Offer and Acceptance, Right of First Refusal, Breach of Contract
Contract Law Offer and Acceptance Right of First Refusal Breach of Contract

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 4 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Goldmaster Homes Pty Ltd

Appellant

Rocky Scarcella

Appellant

Keith Norman Johnson

Respondent

Johnson & Johnson Real Estate Pty Ltd

Respondent

Hills Development Corporation Pty Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there was a concluded contract for a right of first refusal over the land
  2. 2 Whether any obligation to grant the right of first refusal was breached if it existed
  3. 3 Nature and enforceability of a right of first refusal

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that there was no concluded contract for a right of first refusal over the land. Even if such a right existed, the opportunity to purchase was genuinely given to the appellants, who refused on the grounds that the price was too high, thereby discharging any obligation. The court affirmed the trial judge’s findings and dismissed the appeal with costs.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs

Orders

  • [2003] NSWSC 230 affirmed
  • The appeal is dismissed with costs