Sader v Elgammal

In the case of Sader v Elgammal, the plaintiffs, represented by their solicitor, sought damages for breach of contract against the defendant. The dispute arose from a failed property sale where the defendant allegedly failed to honour a purchase agreement for a property in Melbourne. The matter was heard in the Supreme Court of Victoria.

The primary legal issues before the court were whether the defendant had indeed breached the purchase agreement and, if so, the appropriate measure of damages. The plaintiffs argued that the defendant had repudiated the contract by failing to complete the purchase and sought damages for the lost profit they would have made from the sale. The defendant contended that there were legitimate reasons for not completing the transaction and denied any breach.

The court found that the defendant had indeed repudiated the contract by failing to complete the purchase, thereby breaching the agreement. The court further determined that the plaintiffs were entitled to damages equivalent to the lost profit they would have earned from the sale. The court emphasised that the plaintiffs needed to prove the lost profit with reasonable certainty, and the evidence provided was sufficient to meet this burden. The court concluded that the plaintiffs were entitled to the damages claimed, subject to a reduction for any mitigating actions they could have taken.

The court ordered that the defendant pay the plaintiffs the sum of $200,000, reduced by any amount the defendant could demonstrate the plaintiffs could have reasonably mitigated. This amount was calculated based on the evidence presented regarding the expected profit from the sale and the steps the plaintiffs had taken to mitigate their losses. The defendant was also ordered to pay the plaintiffs' costs of the proceeding.