TARVAL PTY LTD v ALLAN PAUL STEVENS;TARVAL PTY LTD v DAVID MATTHEW STEVENS;TARVAL PTY LTD v JAMES JOSEPH SILVA;TARVAL PTY LTD v SUSAN HELEN STEVENS;TARVAL PTY LTD v MORAPI PTY LTD [1990] NSWCA 199

TARVAL PTY LTD v ALLAN PAUL STEVENS;TARVAL PTY LTD v DAVID MATTHEW STEVENS;TARVAL PTY LTD v JAMES JOSEPH SILVA;TARVAL PTY LTD v SUSAN HELEN STEVENS;TARVAL PTY LTD v MORAPI PTY LTD [1990] NSWCA 199

The contract described the property to be sold as a home unit in a wholly residential building, a condition supported by the annexed plan and contract language. By changing the use of the lower floors to commercial premises, the vendor could not transfer a unit in a wholly residential building at the time of completion, which was a fundamental breach. Therefore, the purchasers were entitled to rescind and the appeal must be dismissed.

Parties
Appellant: Tarval Pty Ltd; Respondent: Allan Paul Stevens; Respondent: David Matthew Stevens; Respondent: James Joseph Silva; Respondent: Susan Helen Stevens; Respondent: Morapi Pty Ltd
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 September 1990
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Contract for Sale of Land, Strata Title, Residential Property, Breach of Contract, Construction of Contracts
Contract Law Property Law Contract for Sale of Land Strata Title Residential Property Breach of Contract Construction of Contracts

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 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tarval Pty Ltd

Appellant

Allan Paul Stevens

Respondent

David Matthew Stevens

Respondent

James Joseph Silva

Respondent

Susan Helen Stevens

Respondent

Morapi Pty Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the description of the property as 'residential' in the contract was a fundamental condition
  2. 2 Whether the annexed plan was part of the contract and created contractual obligations
  3. 3 Whether the vendor's inability to transfer a unit in a wholly residential building constituted a fundamental breach

Ratio Decidendi

The contract described the property to be sold as a home unit in a wholly residential building, a condition supported by the annexed plan and contract language. By changing the use of the lower floors to commercial premises, the vendor could not transfer a unit in a wholly residential building at the time of completion, which was a fundamental breach. Therefore, the purchasers were entitled to rescind and the appeal must be dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs

Orders

  • Appeals dismissed with costs