Lockyer Land Plans Pty Ltd v Metcoal Trading Pty Ltd

[2021] QSC 138

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

Lockyer Land Plans Pty Ltd v Metcoal Trading Pty Ltd & Anor [2021] QSC 138

PARTIES:

LOCKYER LAND PLANS PTY LTD
ACN 629 791 288

(plaintiff)

v
METCOAL TRADING PTY LTD
ACN 630 562 800

(first defendant)

JAMES CHRISTOPER HAKOS

(second defendant)

FILE NO/S:

BS 10672 of 2019

DIVISION:

Trial Division

PROCEEDING:

Trial

ORIGINATING COURT:

Supreme Court at Brisbane

DELIVERED ON:

11 June 2021

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATES:

7 June 2021; 8 June 2021

JUDGE:

Freeburn J

ORDERS:

1.    Order for specific performance as per the initialled draft supplied by the plaintiff.

2.    Parties to be heard on costs.

CATCHWORDS:

CONTRACTS – GENERAL CONTRACTUAL PRINCIPLES – DISCHARGE, BREACH AND DEFENCES TO ACTION FOR BREACH – PEFORMANCE – where plaintiff agreed to sell land to first defendant – where first defendant purported to terminate the contract for breach of a confidentiality clause – where plaintiff sues defendants for wrongful termination of the contract and seeks specific performance – where defendants allege plaintiff was not ready, willing and able to perform the contract due to a mortgage over the property – whether plaintiff ready, willing and able to perform the contract

CONTRACTS – GENERAL CONTRACTUAL PRINCIPLES – DISCHARGE, BREACH AND DEFENCES TO ACTION FOR BREACH – CONDITIONS – where plaintiff agreed to sell land to first defendant – where first defendant purported to terminate the contract for breach of a confidentiality clause – where plaintiff sues defendants for wrongful termination of the contract and seeks specific performance – whether first defendant validly terminated the contract due to breach by plaintiff of confidentiality provision in the contract – whether disclosures were made by employees or representatives of the plaintiff

Dare v Pulham (1982) 148 CLR 658
Mehmet v Benson (1965) 113 CLR 295
Orlicki v Brisbane City Council [1961] Qd R 546
Stewart v Kennedy (1890) 15 App Cas 75

Vlasic v Federal Capital Press of Australia Pty Ltd (1976) 9 ACTR 1

COUNSEL:

T Pincus with T Ritchie for the plaintiff

The second defendant appeared on his own behalf and for the first defendant

SOLICITORS:

McCullough Robertson for the plaintiff

The second defendant appeared on his own behalf and for the first defendant

1. By a contract dated 20 June 2019 the plaintiff, Lockyer Land Plans Pty Ltd (‘Lockyer’), agreed to sell a vacant block of vacant land[1] to the first defendant, Metcoal Trading Pty Ltd (‘Metcoal’) for $11,000,000. Just prior to the settlement of the contract, Metcoal’s solicitors wrote to Lockyer’s solicitors purporting to terminate the contract. Lockyer sues Metcoal seeking for specific performance of the contract. Metcoal argues that the contract was validly terminated because Lockyer breached a confidentiality clause in the contract.

   [1]The land is at Lot 952 Bruce Highway, Bowen.

2. The second defendant, Mr Hakos, is sued because he guaranteed Metcoal’s obligations under the contract.  The guarantee is dated 26 June 2019.

3. There are only two issues raised in the pleadings.  The first is whether Lockyer was ready, willing and able to perform…