Nastevski v Wanscher

The New South Wales Court of Appeal considered a dispute between Nastevski and Wanscher concerning a contract for the sale of land. The central issue revolved around whether the purchaser, Nastevski, had validly exercised an option to purchase the property.

The court was required to determine whether the notice of exercise of the option was effectively given to the vendor, Wanscher, in accordance with the terms of the option agreement. This involved an examination of the contractual requirements for valid notice and the legal consequences of any purported non-compliance.

The Court of Appeal held that the notice of exercise was not validly given. It reasoned that the option agreement stipulated that notice must be given to the vendor personally or by registered post to their last known address. The evidence showed that the notice was sent to an address that was not the vendor's last known address, and there was no evidence of personal service. Consequently, the court found that the option had not been exercised.

The appeal was dismissed, and the orders of the primary judge were affirmed.