Dowidar v Bektas

The case of Dowidar v Bektas was before the court where the primary dispute involved the terms of a real estate contract and the obligations of the parties involved in obtaining a licence for a child care centre. The purchaser, Bektas, had entered into a contract with the vendor, Dowidar, which stipulated that the settlement date was contingent upon the purchaser obtaining a licence from the Department of Community Services (DOCS) for the child care centre. However, the purchaser's director, who was responsible for the centre, received psychiatric treatment which was not disclosed when applying for the licence. This omission was later revealed, leading to the refusal of the licence and, in the purchasers' view, completion not occurring.

The legal issues at hand revolved around the interaction of the obligation to take reasonable and proper action to obtain the licence, as established in Butts v O'Dwyer, and the obligation to disclose pertinent information to the licensing authority. Specifically, the court had to determine whether the information about the director's psychiatric treatment was properly disclosed to DOCS and whether there was a breach of the implied obligation of disclosure. Furthermore, the court considered the operation of a non-standard Special Condition in the purchase contract.

The court concluded that the information was appropriately disclosed to DOCS and that there was no breach of the implied obligation of disclosure. The court found that once the referee withdrew the reference, the director's daughter made adverse representations to DOCS, and the purchaser's solicitor sent a report from the psychiatrist, the information was in fact disclosed. Therefore, the deposit was recoverable. The court also examined the obligations of disclosure, relevant discretionary considerations, and the concept of a fit and proper person in the context of the application to DOCS for the licence.