Aussie Invest Corporation Pty Ltd v Pulcesia Pty Ltd

The dispute between Aussie Invest Corporation Pty Ltd and Pulcesia Pty Ltd was heard in the Supreme Court of Queensland. Aussie Invest, the vendor, sought to rescind a contract for the sale of land to Pulcesia, the purchaser, on the grounds of Pulcesia's failure to settle within the stipulated timeframe. Pulcesia, on the other hand, claimed that the rescission was invalid due to issues with the permit and deterioration of property and chattels, and argued that the vendor's conduct contributed to the breach.

The court had to decide whether the rescission notice was valid, whether the purchaser's failure to settle was due to the vendor's actions, and if the vendor's termination was unconscionable. The court also needed to determine if the purchaser was entitled to a return of the deposit under section 49(2) of the Property Law Act (1958).

In its decision, the court found that the rescission notice was validly served and that the purchaser's failure to settle was not due to the vendor's conduct. The court determined that the vendor's exercise of the right to terminate was not unconscionable, and thus the purchaser was not entitled to specific performance. Consequently, the purchaser was not entitled to a return of the deposit. The court ordered that Aussie Invest was entitled to maintain the rescission of the contract and that Pulcesia's claim for the return of the deposit was dismissed.