Romanous v Saleh

The plaintiffs brought proceedings against the defendants seeking an interlocutory injunction to restrain the defendants from disposing of a deposit paid under a contract for sale of land. The plaintiffs also sought summary judgment on the basis that the defendants were liable to return the deposit in full as they were unable to complete the sale of land. The defendants resisted the application and counterclaimed for summary judgment that the plaintiffs were liable to pay a sum equal to the deposit, on the basis that the plaintiffs had failed to complete the sale and were liable for repudiation. The Federal Circuit Court was required to determine whether the plaintiffs were entitled to an interlocutory injunction and whether the defendants were liable to return the deposit in full or if the plaintiffs were liable to pay the sum claimed by the defendants.
The court held that an interlocutory injunction was not appropriate given that the plaintiffs had failed to establish a serious question to be tried that the deposit was to be held by the defendants as a trustee. The plaintiffs had delayed in bringing the proceedings and the deposit was protected by a charge. The court found that there was a triable issue as to whether the defendants were entitled to retain the deposit as the plaintiffs had failed to complete the contract for sale of land. The court held that it was not appropriate to make a summary judgment in favour of either party on the counterclaim. The court determined that there were triable issues as to whether the defendants were entitled to retain the deposit and whether the plaintiffs were liable to pay the sum claimed by the defendants. The court refused the application for an interlocutory injunction and dismissed the application for summary judgment. The counterclaim was to be determined at trial.

No orders were made.