Le v. Bui & Anor

In the matter of Le v. Bui & Anor, the court was asked to determine the rights of the parties in relation to the sale of a property in Melbourne. The applicant, Le, claimed that he had entered into a contract for the sale of the property with the first respondent, Bui, prior to the first respondent entering into a contract with the second respondent. The first respondent contended that the second contract should prevail as it was in the standard form and the applicant had failed to demonstrate that he was ready, willing, and able to proceed to settlement.

The court had to determine whether the first respondent was bound by the first contract with the applicant or whether the second contract with the second respondent was valid and enforceable. The court also had to consider whether the applicant had established that he was ready, willing, and able to proceed to settlement.

The court found that the first contract was valid and binding on the first respondent. The court held that the first respondent was bound by the terms of the first contract and could not rely on the second contract as a defence. The court also found that the applicant had established that he was ready, willing, and able to proceed to settlement. The court ordered that the first respondent pay the applicant's costs of and incidental to the proceedings and the second respondent's costs of and incidental to the proceedings. The court refused the applicant's claim for relief in relation to the sale of the property.