Dai v Zhu

In the matter of *Dai v Zhu*, the Supreme Court of New South Wales was asked to determine a dispute between the plaintiff, Ms. Dai, and the defendant, Mr. Zhu. The core of the disagreement concerned the enforceability of an alleged oral agreement for the sale of a property located at 123 Main Street, Sydney. Ms. Dai claimed that Mr. Zhu had agreed to sell her the property for $1,000,000, and that this agreement was binding despite not being reduced to writing. Mr. Zhu, however, denied the existence of a concluded agreement, or alternatively, argued that any such agreement was unenforceable due to the absence of a written contract.

The primary legal issues before the Court were whether a binding oral contract for the sale of land had been formed between the parties, and if so, whether that contract was rendered unenforceable by the operation of section 54A of the *Conveyancing Act 1919* (NSW). This section requires contracts for the sale or disposition of land to be in writing and signed by the party to be charged, or their agent, to be enforceable. The Court also considered whether any exceptions to this statutory requirement, such as part performance, might apply.

Judge Driver found that the evidence did not establish a concluded oral agreement for the sale of the property. Her Honour analysed the communications between the parties and determined that while negotiations had occurred, there was no clear and unequivocal offer and acceptance that would constitute a binding contract. Consequently, the Court did not need to consider the application of section 54A of the *Conveyancing Act 1919* or any potential exceptions to it.

The Court ordered that the plaintiff's claim be dismissed.