Techno Developers Pty Ltd v The Homes Corporation of Australia [2005] NSWSC 23

Techno Developers Pty Ltd v The Homes Corporation of Australia [2005] NSWSC 23

The evidence did not establish that the special conditions required the vendor to complete the works before completion, nor that the relevant custom or usage was sufficiently established to imply such a term. There was insufficient basis for rectification or relief under the Trade Practices Act. However, the plaintiff was entitled to a refund of the deposits paid under Conveyancing Act 1919 s55(2A).

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 December 2004
Procedural Posture
Equity / Judgment
Outcome
Claim dismissed, except for refund of deposits.
Legal Topics
['implied Terms' 'custom or Usage' 'rectification' 'specific Performance' 'refund of Deposit']
['contracts' 'equity'] ['implied Terms' 'custom or Usage' 'rectification' 'specific Performance' 'refund of Deposit']

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 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Equity / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether special condition 41 required the vendor to fill and cut the lot before completion' 'Whether custom or usage in the relevant industry implied such a term into the contract' "Whether the contract should be rectified to include the term 'before completion'" 'Whether relief should be granted under the Trade Practices Act' 'Whether the plaintiff is entitled to return of deposits under Conveyancing Act 1919 s55(2A)']

Ratio Decidendi

The evidence did not establish that the special conditions required the vendor to complete the works before completion, nor that the relevant custom or usage was sufficiently established to imply such a term. There was insufficient basis for rectification or relief under the Trade Practices Act. However, the plaintiff was entitled to a refund of the deposits paid under Conveyancing Act 1919 s55(2A).

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed, except for refund of deposits.

Orders

  • ['Order for refund of deposits paid under the contracts.' 'Summons otherwise dismissed.' 'No order as to costs, subject to further submissions.']