CURRIE & WILKINS

Currie & Wilkins concerned a dispute between the parties over the proper construction of a clause in a lease agreement. The case was heard by Wilson J in the Supreme Court of Western Australia.

The central legal issue before the court was whether the tenant, Wilkins, was entitled to exercise an option to renew the lease on terms that were to be agreed upon by the parties, or whether the option required the terms of renewal to be fixed at the time the option was exercised.

Wilson J reasoned that the wording of the option clause, which stipulated that the renewal terms were "to be agreed upon by the parties," indicated an intention for future negotiation rather than a pre-determined set of conditions. His Honour applied principles of contractual interpretation, emphasizing that the plain meaning of the words used by the parties should be given effect. The court held that the option was validly exercised, as the tenant had indicated their intention to renew, and the landlord was then obliged to enter into negotiations for the new terms.

The court ordered that the lease be renewed on terms to be agreed between the parties, with liberty to apply further if agreement could not be reached.