Event and Time
Event Description
- On 22 November 2010, Boulos and Edwin Davey entered into a land sale contract for a property in Pyrmont at a price of $10.8 million.
- The contract stipulated a completion date which was later extended to 23 August 2012.
- Boulos failed to complete the sale by the fixed date, leading to a breach of contract.
Application and Claims
- Edwin Davey (the purchaser) claimed damages for breach of contract against Boulos (the vendor) due to the failure to complete the sale on time.
- Boulos contested the nature of the breach and the purchaser's claims for damages.
Judicial Decisions
- The primary judge determined that Boulos's failure to complete the contract did constitute a breach.
- The court acknowledged the purchaser's claims for damages were too remote but acknowledged some entitlement to compensation, setting the stage for further appeal.
Dispute Points and Legal Basis
Dispute Points
- Purchaser (Edwin Davey):
- Claimed that Boulos’s failure constituted a significant breach and sought damages for losses incurred due to the incomplete sale. - Argued that entering a payment deed with Perpetual to cover potential shortfalls was a necessary, reasonable action to mitigate losses.
- Vendor (Boulos):
- Argued that the breach was merely a delay in completion and that the damages claimed were not foreseeable or causally linked to the breach. - Contended that the purchaser had merged their rights upon the property transfer, negating their claim for damages.
- Third Party (Perpetual):
- Suggested that the payment obligation arose due to the purchaser’s own decision to enter into the payment deed, which was viewed as excessive or unwarranted.