Conveyancing – vendor and purchaser case. The question for the court was whether the defendant/ vendors’ purported termination of the contract for failure by the plaintiff/ purchaser to comply with a notice to complete was effective, or whether the purported termination was wrongful and amounted to a repudiation by the vendors which was accepted by the purchaser, bringing the contract to an end.
If the vendors’ termination was effective then the vendors are entitled to damages in an agreed amount which gives credit for the deposit paid; if the purchaser is correct then she is entitled to return of the deposit plus interest
Summary of the judgment follows:-
a. The relevant requisitions on title were proper requisitions to which the vendors were required to give a proper answer. They did not do so before the date fixed for completion in the contract.
b. This meant that the purchaser was not in default for failing to complete on the date for completion in the contract.
c. The answer to a particular requisition on 16 December was adequate. But as the date fixed had passed it was necessary to allow a reasonable time after the reply was made before it could be said the purchaser was in default, so as to justify a notice to complete. That time had not passed.
d. The purported termination consequent upon the expiry of the notice to complete amounted to a repudiation of the contract. The vendor’s repudiation of the contract brought the contract to an end entitling the purchaser to a refund of deposit.
