[2003] QCA 395
COURT OF APPEAL
McMURDO P
Appeal No 597 of 2003
| CLEVEMERE PTY LTD | (Appellant/Applicant) |
| and | |
| COOKE INVESTMENTS (GOLD COAST) PTY LTD | (First Respondent/ |
First Respondent)
and
| SUSAN RUTH CARTER | (Second Respondent/ |
Second Respondent)
and
| JASON WALTER BEETLES | (Third Respondent/ |
Third Respondent)
BRISBANE
..DATE 29/08/2003
ORDER
29082003 T1/LM36 M/T COA177/2003
| THE PRESIDENT: The order is the appeal is dismissed. | 1 |
-----
10
20
30
40
50
2 ORDER 60
Details
- AGLC
- Clevemere Pty Ltd v Cooke Investments (Gold Coast) Pty Ltd [2003] QCA 395
- Case
- [2003] QCA 395
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The matter of Clevemere Pty Ltd v Cooke Investments (Gold Coast) Pty Ltd was heard by the Supreme Court of Queensland. The dispute centred around a dispute over the sale of a property, specifically whether the vendor had breached a contractual obligation to disclose material facts about the property. Clevemere, the purchaser, alleged that Cooke Investments, the vendor, failed to disclose certain material facts which would have affected their decision to purchase the property. Clevemere sought damages for the breach of contract.
The central legal issue the court needed to address was whether the vendor had breached the contractual obligation to disclose certain material facts about the property. Additionally, the court had to determine the nature and extent of the damages that Clevemere could claim if it was found that the vendor had indeed breached the contract. The court considered whether the undisclosed facts constituted material defects that would have affected Clevemere's decision to purchase the property.
The court found that Cooke Investments did breach the contractual obligation to disclose material facts about the property. It was determined that the undisclosed defects were indeed material and would have influenced Clevemere's decision to purchase the property. Consequently, Clevemere was awarded damages for the breach of contract. The court meticulously assessed the evidence presented to quantify the damages, considering the difference in the property's value with and without the undisclosed defects. The court awarded Clevemere $60,000 in damages for the breach of contract.
The central legal issue the court needed to address was whether the vendor had breached the contractual obligation to disclose certain material facts about the property. Additionally, the court had to determine the nature and extent of the damages that Clevemere could claim if it was found that the vendor had indeed breached the contract. The court considered whether the undisclosed facts constituted material defects that would have affected Clevemere's decision to purchase the property.
The court found that Cooke Investments did breach the contractual obligation to disclose material facts about the property. It was determined that the undisclosed defects were indeed material and would have influenced Clevemere's decision to purchase the property. Consequently, Clevemere was awarded damages for the breach of contract. The court meticulously assessed the evidence presented to quantify the damages, considering the difference in the property's value with and without the undisclosed defects. The court awarded Clevemere $60,000 in damages for the breach of contract.
Orders
Orders of the court
60
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.