Alexakis v Wan

In the case of Alexakis v Wan, the High Court of Australia was asked to determine the interpretation of a contractual obligation relating to the payment of a deposit for the sale of land. The vendor and purchaser had entered into a contract on 4 April 2019, stipulating that a deposit would be paid in two instalments, with the second instalment due "on the 4th month after the contract date." The central dispute was whether the second instalment was due on 4 August 2019 or by 31 August 2019. The purchaser failed to pay the second instalment by 4 August 2019, leading the vendor to terminate the contract on 5 August 2019.

The court was required to interpret the phrase "4th month after the contract date" under the terms of the contract, considering the definitions of "month" provided in the Conveyancing Act 1919 (NSW) and the Interpretation Act 1987 (NSW). The court also needed to determine whether the equitable doctrine of relief against the exercise of strict legal rights could apply to prevent the forfeiture of the deposit, given that the purchaser's failure to pay was due to a mistake and not misconduct by the vendor.

The court held that the phrase "4th month after the contract date" should be interpreted as 4 August 2019, based on the statutory definitions of "month" as a "calendar month." The purchaser's failure to pay the deposit by this date constituted a serious breach, which was essential to the contract. Given that the vendor had not contributed to the purchaser's mistake and would not suffer substantial loss or prejudice if the contract were enforced, the court declined to grant equitable relief. The vendor's exercise of their right to terminate the contract and forfeit the deposit was deemed just and equitable in the circumstances. The court thus dismissed the purchaser's application for relief under section 55(2A) of the Conveyancing Act 1919 (NSW).