Mann v Condon

In *Mann v Condon*, the Supreme Court of New South Wales considered a dispute between a vendor and a purchaser concerning the sale of a property. The purchaser sought to terminate the contract of sale, alleging that the vendor had breached a contractual term requiring the property to be vacant on settlement. The vendor contended that the presence of a tenant, who had not vacated by the settlement date, did not constitute a breach of contract.

The central legal issue before the Court was whether the vendor's failure to deliver vacant possession of the property on the settlement date amounted to a breach of the contract of sale, entitling the purchaser to terminate. This required the Court to interpret the specific terms of the contract, particularly the clause relating to vacant possession, and to consider the legal implications of a tenant remaining in occupation beyond the agreed settlement date.

The Court reasoned that the contractual term requiring vacant possession was a condition of the contract. It held that the vendor's obligation was to ensure the property was free from any encumbrances or occupants at settlement. The continued presence of the tenant, even if the vendor had taken steps to have them vacate, meant that vacant possession had not been given. Consequently, the vendor was in breach of the contract.

The Court found that the purchaser was entitled to terminate the contract due to the vendor's breach. The orders made reflected this finding, allowing the purchaser to rescind the contract and recover their deposit.