Melhem & Anor v Harrison

The case of *Melhem & Anor v Harrison* concerned a dispute between the appellants, Mr. and Mrs. Melhem, and the respondent, Mr. Harrison, regarding a contract for the sale of land. The primary issue before the High Court of Australia was whether the appellants had validly terminated the contract. The appellants sought to terminate the contract on the grounds that the respondent had failed to comply with a notice to complete, which they contended was a condition precedent to their obligation to settle.

The central legal question before the High Court was whether the notice to complete served by the appellants was valid and effective in terminating the contract. This required the court to consider the requirements for a valid notice to complete under the contract and relevant common law principles, particularly concerning the certainty and clarity of the notice. The court also had to determine whether the respondent's alleged failure to comply with the notice constituted a breach that entitled the appellants to terminate.

Gummow and Heydon JJ held that the notice to complete was invalid. Their Honours reasoned that the notice was defective because it did not specify a reasonable time for completion, a requirement for a valid notice to complete at common law. The court applied the principle that a notice to complete must allow a reasonable period for performance, and that a notice that fails to do so is ineffective. Consequently, the appellants were not entitled to terminate the contract on the basis of the purported notice.

The High Court therefore allowed the appeal, setting aside the orders of the lower courts. The contract was not terminated by the notice, and the parties were to be afforded further directions regarding the future conduct of the matter.