Tam v Mannall [2010] NSWSC 250

Tam v Mannall [2010] NSWSC 250

The evidence did not establish convincingly that both parties had a common intention at the time of contract that GST would be payable in addition to the bid price. Nor was it shown that the purchaser heard or adopted any such statement at auction. The written contract, containing a price inclusive of GST as per clause 13.2, represented the final agreement. Rectification was not warranted and the specific performance of the written contract was ordered.

Parties
Plaintiff: Peter Man Leung Tam; First Defendant: Dulce Edith Mannall; Second Defendant: Peter Lumsden Mannall
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
01 April 2010
Procedural Posture
Equity Proceedings (specific Performance and Rectification) / Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Declaration of contract validity and order for specific performance in favour of plaintiff; cross-claim dismissed with costs ordered against defendants.
Legal Topics
Contract for Sale of Land, Specific Performance, Rectification, Parol Evidence Rule, GST in Conveyancing, Collateral Contracts, Common Mistake
Conveyancing Contracts Equity Contract for Sale of Land Specific Performance Rectification Parol Evidence Rule GST in Conveyancing +2 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 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Peter Man Leung Tam

Plaintiff

Dulce Edith Mannall

First Defendant

Peter Lumsden Mannall

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Equity Proceedings (specific Performance and Rectification) / Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the written contract for the sale of land was supplemented by an inconsistent oral agreement regarding GST
  2. 2 Whether the contract should be rectified on the basis of alleged common mistake to provide for GST on top of the purchase price rather than inclusive
  3. 3 Whether specific performance of the written contract in its original form should be ordered

Ratio Decidendi

The evidence did not establish convincingly that both parties had a common intention at the time of contract that GST would be payable in addition to the bid price. Nor was it shown that the purchaser heard or adopted any such statement at auction. The written contract, containing a price inclusive of GST as per clause 13.2, represented the final agreement. Rectification was not warranted and the specific performance of the written contract was ordered.

Court Disposition

Declaration of contract validity and order for specific performance in favour of plaintiff; cross-claim dismissed with costs ordered against defendants.

Orders

  • Declare that the contract for sale made between the defendants as vendors and the plaintiff as purchaser dated 7 March 2009 relating to the property in Burwood Road Burwood which is the whole of the land in Folio Identifiers 3/10833 and B/27199 is valid and enforceable and ought to be specifically performed.
  • Order that the defendants do specifically perform the said contract for sale.