Hill & Ebert

In *Hill & Ebert*, the Supreme Court of Queensland was asked to determine whether a party to a contract for the sale of land was entitled to terminate the contract due to the other party's failure to comply with a notice to complete. The dispute arose after the purchasers failed to complete the sale by the stipulated date, prompting the vendors to issue a notice to complete. The purchasers subsequently failed to comply with this notice, leading the vendors to terminate the contract. The purchasers then sought to have the termination declared invalid and sought specific performance of the contract.

The central legal issue before Hannam J was whether the notice to complete was valid and effective, thereby entitling the vendors to terminate the contract. This required the court to consider the requirements for a valid notice to complete under the contract and the relevant common law principles governing such notices, particularly in the context of a potential breach of contract. The court also had to assess whether the purchasers had established grounds for specific performance, notwithstanding their failure to comply with the notice.

Hannam J found that the notice to complete was valid and that the purchasers' failure to comply with it entitled the vendors to terminate the contract. The court applied the principles that a notice to complete must be clear and unambiguous in its demands and must specify a reasonable time for completion. In this instance, the notice met these requirements. Consequently, the purchasers' failure to complete within the time stipulated in the valid notice constituted a repudiatory breach of the contract, which the vendors were entitled to accept by terminating the agreement. The court therefore dismissed the purchasers' claim for specific performance.