Filmlock Pty Limited v Nissi Investments Pty Limited (No 2)

In this case, Filmlock Pty Limited, the vendor, sought a declaration that Nissi Investments Pty Limited, the purchaser, was in default for failing to complete the contract for sale of land. The dispute was heard in the Supreme Court of Queensland. The primary issue for the court was whether the purchaser had valid grounds to refuse completion due to a minor inaccuracy in the land's description and alleged defects in the vendor's title. The court was also required to consider the implications of rights of carriageway and restrictions on use created after the contract, and whether these circumstances entitled the purchaser to object, make a requisition, or claim for compensation or rescission.

The court found that the minor inaccuracy in the land description did not create uncertainty regarding the subject matter of the contract, and therefore did not justify the purchaser's refusal to complete. The court held that the purchaser's right to object, make a requisition, or claim for compensation or rescission was limited and could not be exercised based on post-contractual rights of carriageway or restrictions on use. The court emphasised that the purchaser was obliged to complete the contract unless there were significant defects that went to the root of the contract. Given the minor nature of the defects identified, the purchaser was found to be in default for failing to complete the contract.

The Supreme Court declared that Nissi Investments Pty Limited was in default for failing to complete the contract for sale of land with Filmlock Pty Limited. The court ordered Nissi Investments to complete the contract within a specified period or pay damages to Filmlock for the loss suffered due to the failure to complete. Additionally, the court awarded costs to Filmlock for the proceedings.