25 Sept 2019
The vendor is bound by her solicitor's clear confirmations that clause 19 was satisfied by actual or ostensible authority; plaintiffs relied on that representation and the defendant has no tenable defence on summary judgment, entitling plaintiffs to specific performance of the sale contract.
27 Jun 2017
The application was dismissed because the caveator failed to demonstrate a reasonably arguable estoppel: the respondent had no duty in conscience to correct the applicant solicitor's miscalculation, the communications were equivocal and not sufficiently unequivocal to found reliance, it was unreasonable to rely on the alleged assurance given the contract wording and available means of verification, and a binding backup contract and vendor duties reinforced that no extension was arguable; accordingly the caveat must lapse.