McDowell v Kelic [2000] NSWSC 796

McDowell v Kelic [2000] NSWSC 796

Neither party is entitled to compensation or relief—Mrs McDowell failed to show the caveat was lodged without proper cause under s74P Real Property Act; Mr Kelic failed to show breach of contract or any unfairness/unconscionability justifying relief under the Contracts Review Act. The balance purchase price remains owing but no damages or compensation are payable under the claims made.

Parties
Plaintiff/cross Defendant: Lynette Mary McDowell; Defendant/cross Claimant: Ivo Kelic
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
02 August 2000
Procedural Posture
Equity/contract / Final Judgment
Outcome
Plaintiff’s claim for compensation dismissed. Cross-claim dismissed. Costs awarded.
Legal Topics
Strata Unit Development, Breach of Contract, Caveats, Contracts Review Act, Real Property Act
Contract Property Law Equity Strata Unit Development Breach of Contract Caveats Contracts Review Act Real Property Act

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 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lynette Mary McDowell

Plaintiff/cross Defendant

Ivo Kelic

Defendant/cross Claimant

Procedural Posture

Equity/contract / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Mrs McDowell breached contractual obligations to Mr Kelic under agreements for strata unit development
  2. 2 Whether Mr Kelic is entitled to relief under Contracts Review Act 1980
  3. 3 Whether Mrs McDowell is entitled to compensation under s74P Real Property Act 1900 for wrongful caveat

Ratio Decidendi

Neither party is entitled to compensation or relief—Mrs McDowell failed to show the caveat was lodged without proper cause under s74P Real Property Act; Mr Kelic failed to show breach of contract or any unfairness/unconscionability justifying relief under the Contracts Review Act. The balance purchase price remains owing but no damages or compensation are payable under the claims made.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff’s claim for compensation dismissed. Cross-claim dismissed. Costs awarded.

Orders

  • Plaintiff’s claim in paragraph 2A of amended summons dismissed.
  • Further amended cross-claim dismissed.