Permanent Trustee Nominees (Canberra) Limited v Coral Sea Resort Motel Pty Ltd

Permanent Trustee Nominees (Canberra) Limited (the applicant) sought special leave to appeal to the High Court of Australia against a decision of the Full Court. The dispute concerned the validity of a clause within a management agreement that allegedly imposed a restraint on the alienation of land. The applicant argued that the Full Court had erred in its application of the principles established in *Hall v Busst* to the facts of the case.

The central legal issue before the High Court was whether a limited contractual restraint upon the alienation of property is void as against public policy, and specifically, whether the Full Court had correctly interpreted and applied the decision in *Hall v Busst* in determining the validity of clause 6 of the management agreement. The applicant contended that *Hall v Busst* only invalidated absolute restraints on alienation and did not extend to limited restraints.

The applicant's counsel argued that the Full Court had misinterpreted *Hall v Busst* by concluding that it supported the invalidity of limited restraints. They detailed the differing judgments in *Hall v Busst*, highlighting that only two judges found the provisions void as imposing a total restraint, while others found the restraint either not to arise upon a particular construction or to be void for requiring an offer at an undervalue. The applicant submitted that the Full Court's reasoning, particularly the differing interpretations of *Hall v Busst* by the judges of that court, demonstrated an incorrect application of the precedent.