Ramsay and ANOR v Menso and ANOR (No.2)

In *Ramsay and ANOR v Menso and ANOR (No.2)*, the Supreme Court of Queensland was asked to determine a dispute between the Ramsay parties, who were the purchasers of a property, and the Menso parties, who were the vendors. The core of the dispute concerned the purchasers' entitlement to terminate the contract for the sale of the property due to alleged breaches by the vendors.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether the vendors had breached the contract by failing to provide vacant possession of the property on the settlement date, as required by clause 14.1 of the standard REIQ contract. This involved considering whether the presence of certain items belonging to the vendors constituted a failure to provide vacant possession, and if so, whether this failure amounted to a repudiation of the contract by the vendors, thereby entitling the purchasers to terminate.

Judge Vasta reasoned that the contract required the vendors to deliver the property free from all chattels and effects of the vendors. The Court found that the vendors had failed to remove all their personal belongings from the property, including items in the shed and garage, and that this constituted a breach of the obligation to provide vacant possession. This breach was considered sufficiently serious to amount to a repudiation of the contract, allowing the purchasers to terminate. The Court applied the principle that a failure to provide vacant possession is a material breach that can justify termination.

Consequently, the Court ordered that the purchasers were entitled to terminate the contract and recover their deposit, along with other consequential losses.