Jainran Pty Ltd v Boyana

Jainran Pty Ltd v Boyana involved a dispute between the vendor and purchaser of a property in relation to the sale of land that was subject to a lease with a service station. The purchaser sought rescission of the contract on the grounds of misrepresentation and breaches of statutory warranties under the Conveyancing Act. The case was heard by the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The legal issues the court was required to determine included whether the contract disclosed an adverse affectation that would have impacted the property's value, specifically a proposed road widening, and whether the vendor's statement of not being aware of any legal proceedings affecting the property constituted a misrepresentation. Additionally, the court had to assess whether a brochure provided by the agent, which failed to disclose disputes and pending litigation with the tenant, constituted misleading conduct under the Australian Consumer Law.

The court found that the contract did not disclose the road widening proposal, which was a material fact that could affect the property's value. Furthermore, the court determined that the vendor's statement about not being aware of legal proceedings was a misrepresentation, as there was indeed pending litigation by the tenant. These misrepresentations were sufficient grounds for rescission under the Conveyancing Act. The court also held that the brochure provided by the agent constituted misleading conduct because it omitted significant information about the tenant's disputes and litigation. The court awarded the deposit paid to the vendor as damages but ruled that it could not be recovered due to the nature of the misleading conduct. The court held both the vendor and the agent liable for the damages, noting the proportional liability provisions under the CLERP legislation, which applied even though the deposit was paid before the legislation took effect.