Earnshaw v Gorman & Sons Pty Ltd

In the case of Earnshaw v Gorman & Sons Pty Ltd, the dispute involved the sale of a farm shed by the vendors, Gorman & Sons Pty Ltd, to the plaintiff, Earnshaw. The contract for sale stipulated that the shed was to be demolished by the buyer and removed. The contract was constituted by a tender document which had been amended by an oral agreement. The issue was whether the time to remove the shed was unlimited or required to be removed within a reasonable time, given that time was not of the essence and the contract could not be terminated without prior notice by the vendor requiring performance. The vendor was also unable to deliver when the buyer sought to remove the shed.

The court considered whether the time for demolition and removal was unlimited or whether it had to be done within a reasonable time. The court found that the vendors were liable for damages for breach of contract as they were unable to deliver when the buyer sought to remove the shed. The court held that notwithstanding the express provision in the written contract, time was not of the essence and the contract could not be terminated without prior notice by the vendor requiring performance. The vendors were also liable for damages for breach of contract as they were unable to deliver when the buyer sought to remove the shed.

The court's reasoning and outcome was that the vendors were liable for damages for breach of contract as they were unable to deliver when the buyer sought to remove the shed. The court held that the time for demolition and removal was not unlimited and had to be done within a reasonable time. The vendors could not terminate the contract without prior notice by the vendor requiring performance. The appeal was dismissed.