Le v Dobe

In *Le v Dobe* [1996] NSWCA 319, the New South Wales Court of Appeal considered a dispute between the appellant, Le, and the respondent, Dobe, concerning the enforceability of a contract for the sale of land. The core of the disagreement revolved around whether the contract had been validly terminated by the vendor.

The primary legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether the vendor, Dobe, had validly exercised its right to terminate the contract for the sale of land due to the purchaser's alleged breach of a time stipulation. This involved determining whether the notice of termination given by the vendor was effective and whether the purchaser had been afforded sufficient time to complete the purchase.

The Court of Appeal found that the notice of termination was invalid. It held that for a notice requiring a party to complete a contract for the sale of land to be effective, it must specify a reasonable time for completion. In this instance, the notice issued by the vendor did not allow a reasonable period for the purchaser to remedy the breach, rendering the termination ineffective. The Court applied the established legal principle that time is not of the essence in contracts for the sale of land unless expressly stated or implied by the circumstances, and even then, a party seeking to terminate must provide a reasonable period for performance after giving notice of the breach.

Consequently, the Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, finding that the contract remained on foot and that the vendor had wrongfully repudiated it.