Wilde v Anstee (No.2) [1999] NSWSC 819

Wilde v Anstee (No.2) [1999] NSWSC 819

The plaintiffs validly terminated the contract and are entitled to recover the deposit held by the real estate agent and any proceeds of investment, as well as damages to be assessed. The first defendant failed to establish entitlement to return of deposit or damages. There was no slip requiring correction in the previous reasons. Costs should follow the event and extend to cover the District Court proceedings, as commencing there was reasonable and there was plausible jurisdiction.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 August 1999
Procedural Posture
Vendor and Purchaser Dispute / Post Trial; Judgment Following Hearing and After Reasons for Judgment Delivered Previously
Outcome
Orders made in plaintiffs' favour, with costs.
Legal Topics
['vendor and Purchaser' 'slip Rule' 'contract Termination' 'recovery of Deposit' 'assessment of Damages' 'form of Orders' 'jurisdiction of District Court' 'costs']
['equity' 'contract Law' 'property Law'] ['vendor and Purchaser' 'slip Rule' 'contract Termination' 'recovery of Deposit' 'assessment of Damages' 'form of Orders' 'jurisdiction of District Court' 'costs']

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

Vendor and Purchaser Dispute / Post Trial; Judgment Following Hearing and After Reasons for Judgment Delivered Previously

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the plaintiffs validly terminated the contract and are entitled to the deposit and damages' "Whether there is a 'slip' in reasons for judgment requiring correction" 'Correct form of orders to be made for assessment of damages' 'Entitlement and form of costs orders including those arising from proceedings in District Court and Supreme Court' 'Whether the District Court had jurisdiction over proceedings regarding recovery of the deposit']

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiffs validly terminated the contract and are entitled to recover the deposit held by the real estate agent and any proceeds of investment, as well as damages to be assessed. The first defendant failed to establish entitlement to return of deposit or damages. There was no slip requiring correction in the previous reasons. Costs should follow the event and extend to cover the District Court proceedings, as commencing there was reasonable and there was plausible jurisdiction.

Court Disposition

Orders made in plaintiffs' favour, with costs.

Orders

  • ['Declaration that the second notice to complete and notice of rescission were valid and effective.' 'Declaration that the first defendant breached the contract.' 'Order that plaintiffs are entitled to the deposit and proceeds of investment.' 'Order that the second defendant pay over the deposit and investment...