Zhu v Snell [2014] NSWSC 468

Zhu v Snell [2014] NSWSC 468

The contract for sale of land was not validly terminated by the first defendant. Even if it was, the conduct of the defendants revived the contract. Any equitable interest claimed by the second defendant is postponed to the plaintiff's interest. The plaintiff is entitled to specific performance as he was ready, willing and able to complete. Neither impossibility nor hardship was sufficiently established to deny specific performance.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 April 2014
Procedural Posture
Civil / Judgment in First Instance After Hearing
Outcome
Plaintiff entitled to specific performance
Legal Topics
['contract for Sale of Land' 'termination of Contract' 'equitable Interests' 'specific Performance' 'notice to Complete' 'remedies for Breach of Contract']
['real Property' 'equity' 'remedies'] ['contract for Sale of Land' 'termination of Contract' 'equitable Interests' 'specific Performance' 'notice to Complete' 'remedies for 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 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Civil / Judgment in First Instance After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the contract for sale of land was validly terminated' 'Whether the conduct amounted to revival of contract' 'Whether notice to complete was valid' 'Whether second defendant had an equitable interest in the property prior to exchange of contracts' 'Whether plaintiff had notice of any such interest' 'Whether any equitable interest of the second defendant is postponed to that of the plaintiff' 'Whether plaintiff is entitled to specific performance' 'Whether plaintiff was ready, willing and able to complete' 'Whether specific performance should be denied for impossibility or hardship' 'Whether damages were an adequate remedy']

Ratio Decidendi

The contract for sale of land was not validly terminated by the first defendant. Even if it was, the conduct of the defendants revived the contract. Any equitable interest claimed by the second defendant is postponed to the plaintiff's interest. The plaintiff is entitled to specific performance as he was ready, willing and able to complete. Neither impossibility nor hardship was sufficiently established to deny specific performance.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff entitled to specific performance

Orders

  • ['Declaration that the plaintiff is entitled to specific performance of the contract' 'Orders corresponding with paragraphs 2, 7, 8, 10, 11 and 13 of the Amended Summons' 'Order regarding settlement adjustment schedule to be made in chambers' 'Leave granted to plaintiff to apply for further orders as required']