Hewitt v CASELLA

The Supreme Court of Western Australia considered an application for summary judgment brought by several plaintiffs against the defendant, Dominic Casella, regarding contracts for the sale of lots in a proposed subdivision. The plaintiffs sought a declaration that a notice of termination served by Casella was ineffective and that the contracts remained in force. The dispute centered on whether Casella was entitled to terminate the contracts based on conditions attached to the subdivision approval granted by the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC). The key legal issue was whether the terms specified by Western Power for the provision of electricity constituted a condition of the subdivision approval that would allow Casella to terminate the contracts. The court held that the meaning of the contract clause allowing termination was clear and unambiguous. It referred only to conditions to which the WAPC approval itself was subject. The requirements specified by Western Power did not constitute such a condition. Therefore, Casella was not entitled to terminate the contracts. The court granted the plaintiffs' application for summary judgment and declared that the contracts remained in full force and effect. The precise terms of the orders and costs were to be determined in subsequent hearings.