Morris v Hanley

In *Morris v Hanley*, the Supreme Court of Queensland considered a dispute between a vendor and a purchaser concerning the sale of a residential property. The purchaser sought to terminate the contract, alleging a breach by the vendor in failing to provide vacant possession on the settlement date. The vendor contended that the purchaser was not entitled to terminate and sought specific performance of the contract.

The central legal issue before the Court was whether the vendor's failure to deliver vacant possession by the settlement date constituted a repudiatory breach of the contract, thereby entitling the purchaser to terminate. The Court also had to consider the implications of the purchaser's actions following the settlement date and whether these actions affirmed the contract.

The Court reasoned that the obligation to provide vacant possession on settlement was a fundamental term of the contract. It found that the vendor's inability to provide vacant possession due to the continued occupation of the property by a tenant, despite the vendor's efforts to secure vacant possession, amounted to a breach of this fundamental term. However, the Court also held that the purchaser's subsequent conduct, including their continued engagement with the vendor regarding the settlement and their failure to unequivocally accept the vendor's repudiation, amounted to an affirmation of the contract. Consequently, the purchaser was not entitled to terminate the contract.

The Court ordered specific performance of the contract in favour of the vendor, requiring the purchaser to complete the purchase.