Koutafides & Anor & Sausurre

The proceeding concerned an application by the plaintiffs, Koutafides and Sausurre, for an interlocutory injunction to restrain the defendant, Mr. Koutafides, from proceeding with the sale of certain real property. The dispute arose from an alleged agreement for the sale of the property by the defendant to the plaintiffs, which the defendant subsequently denied. The matter came before Berman J of the Supreme Court of Victoria.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether the plaintiffs had established a sufficient likelihood of success on their claim for specific performance of the alleged contract for sale to warrant the grant of an interlocutory injunction. This required the Court to consider whether there was a concluded agreement for the sale of the property, and if so, whether it was sufficiently certain to be enforceable.

Berman J found that the evidence did not establish a concluded agreement between the parties. His Honour noted that while there had been negotiations and a draft contract, essential terms remained to be agreed upon, particularly concerning the deposit and the date for settlement. The Court applied the principles that for a contract to be enforceable, there must be a concluded agreement on all essential terms, and that an agreement to agree is generally not enforceable. Without a concluded agreement, the plaintiffs could not demonstrate a likelihood of success in their claim for specific performance, and therefore, the threshold for granting an interlocutory injunction was not met.

Consequently, the Court dismissed the application for an interlocutory injunction.