Malouf v Sterling Estates Development Corporation Pty Ltd [2002] NSWSC 920

Malouf v Sterling Estates Development Corporation Pty Ltd [2002] NSWSC 920

The uneven floor constituted a 'special fault' requiring rectification before completion. As the vendor had not remedied it by the time of the notice to complete, the vendor was not entitled to issue the notice. The vendor's termination was therefore invalid and specific performance should be ordered.

Parties
Plaintiff: Sam John Malouf; Plaintiff: Christine Malouf; Defendant: Sterling Estates Development Corporation Pty Ltd; Defendant: Dexta Corporation Ltd
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 September 2002
Procedural Posture
Civil / Final Judgment
Outcome
order for specific performance; cross-claim dismissed; costs to be paid by vendor
Legal Topics
Notice to Complete, Special Defects, Termination of Contract, Specific Performance
Equity Conveyancing Notice to Complete Special Defects Termination of Contract Specific Performance

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 5 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sam John Malouf

Plaintiff

Christine Malouf

Plaintiff

Sterling Estates Development Corporation Pty Ltd

Defendant

Dexta Corporation Ltd

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether vendor was entitled to issue notice to complete
  2. 2 Whether defects were 'special faults' requiring rectification before completion
  3. 3 Whether notice of termination was valid

Ratio Decidendi

The uneven floor constituted a 'special fault' requiring rectification before completion. As the vendor had not remedied it by the time of the notice to complete, the vendor was not entitled to issue the notice. The vendor's termination was therefore invalid and specific performance should be ordered.

Court Disposition

order for specific performance; cross-claim dismissed; costs to be paid by vendor

Orders

  • Order for specific performance in the usual form
  • Dismissal of vendor's cross-claim