McIntosh v Hadco Constructions Pty Limited & Anor [2003] NSWCA 348

McIntosh v Hadco Constructions Pty Limited & Anor [2003] NSWCA 348

At the time the counterparts were exchanged, no nominee existed and only the grantee, Mr Haddad, was the purchaser as defined; as he signed his counterpart, the option was valid under s 66ZG(1).

Parties
Appellant: Robert James McIntosh; First Respondent: Hadco Constructions Pty Limited; Second Respondent: Kathleen Jane McIntosh
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 November 2003
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
Option to Purchase, Conveyancing Act 1919 S 66 ZG, Nominee in Property Transaction
Real Property Option to Purchase Conveyancing Act 1919 S 66 ZG Nominee in Property Transaction

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Robert James McIntosh

Appellant

Hadco Constructions Pty Limited

First Respondent

Kathleen Jane McIntosh

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the option to purchase residential property was void pursuant to Conveyancing Act 1919, s 66ZG(1) because one counterpart was not signed by the nominee purchaser

Ratio Decidendi

At the time the counterparts were exchanged, no nominee existed and only the grantee, Mr Haddad, was the purchaser as defined; as he signed his counterpart, the option was valid under s 66ZG(1).

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed with costs.