Ding v Su [2012] NSWSC 629
Service on the vendor's solicitor was sufficient under the contract and UCPR r 10.6; delay in settlement after January 2009 was attributable to the fault of the vendor, therefore interest does not accrue; plaintiffs are entitled to specific performance as neither party has terminated the contract and no defence of laches defeats the claim.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 02 May 2012
- Procedural Posture
- Specific Performance Claim / Final Judgment
- Outcome
- Specific performance granted
- Legal Topics
- ['contract for the Sale of Land' 'specific Performance' 'service of Documents' 'interest on Purchase Price']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Specific Performance Claim / Final Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether there was sufficient service on the defendant' 'Whether interest is payable on the balance purchase price' 'Whether the plaintiffs are entitled to specific performance']
Ratio Decidendi
Service on the vendor's solicitor was sufficient under the contract and UCPR r 10.6; delay in settlement after January 2009 was attributable to the fault of the vendor, therefore interest does not accrue; plaintiffs are entitled to specific performance as neither party has terminated the contract and no defence of laches defeats the claim.
Court Disposition
Specific performance granted
Orders
- ['Declare that the agreement made on 16 January 2005 between the defendant as vendor and the plaintiffs as purchasers ought to be specifically performed and carried into execution.' 'Order that the defendant specifically perform and carry into execution the said agreement insofar as the same remains to be...
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment