Mordue v Kroone

The parties to the proceedings were Mordue, the vendor, and Kroone, the purchaser, who had entered into a contract for the sale of land. The dispute centred around the enforceability of an option to purchase and the appropriate form of notice to exercise that option. The matter was heard and determined in the Supreme Court of Victoria. The court was required to decide whether a disconformity in the description of the land in the exchange of dissimilar counterparts rendered the contract unenforceable. Additionally, the court had to determine whether the form of notice of exercise of the option to purchase complied with the contractual requirements, and whether a condition precedent to the exercise of the option had been satisfied.

The court found that the disconformity in the description of the land did not affect the validity of the contract as the identical plan of the land was attached to both counterparts of the contract. The court also held that the form of notice of exercise of the option to purchase was acceptable, despite the purchaser's request for an additional contract, as the contract did not require this. Finally, the court concluded that the condition precedent to the exercise of the option had been satisfied, as the purchaser had demonstrated an unequivocal intention to exercise the option. The court granted specific performance, ordering the vendor to complete the sale of the land to the purchaser.

The Supreme Court of Victoria found in favour of the purchaser, ordering specific performance of the contract for the sale of the land. The court held that the disconformity in the description of the land did not invalidate the contract, and that the form of notice of exercise of the option to purchase was acceptable. The court further determined that the condition precedent to the exercise of the option had been satisfied, and granted specific performance of the contract. The vendor was ordered to complete the sale of the land to the purchaser, as per the terms of the contract.