GTFM Inc v Peter Geoffrey Brock

GTFM Inc (the applicant) sought an order for specific performance of a contract for the sale of land against Peter Geoffrey Brock (the respondent). The dispute concerned the respondent's refusal to complete the sale of a property located at 100 Main Street, Sydney, despite the applicant having paid the deposit and met all contractual obligations. The matter came before the Supreme Court of New South Wales.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether the applicant was entitled to an order for specific performance of the contract for sale. This required the Court to consider whether damages would be an adequate remedy for the breach of contract, and whether there were any equitable reasons why specific performance should not be granted. The Court also had to determine if the respondent had any valid grounds to resist the claim for specific performance.

The Court found that the subject matter of the contract, a specific parcel of land, was unique and that damages at common law would not adequately compensate the applicant for the loss of the bargain. The Court applied the equitable principle that specific performance is a discretionary remedy, but one that is routinely granted for contracts concerning land, as land is considered inherently unique. The respondent's arguments against specific performance were found to be without merit, as he had failed to establish any grounds for equitable relief or a defence to the claim.

Consequently, the Court ordered that the respondent specifically perform the contract for the sale of the property at 100 Main Street, Sydney, by completing the transfer of title to the applicant.