Simpson v Jackson

Simpson v Jackson is a case that involved a dispute between a vendor and a purchaser regarding the validity of a contract termination. The plaintiffs, Simpson, were the purchasers of a property from the defendant, Jackson, the vendor. The dispute arose from the interpretation of a clause in their standard form contract which allowed the vendor to terminate the contract if notice of a satisfactory building and pest inspection was not provided to the vendor’s solicitors by 5pm on the date of inspection. The buyers failed to notify the sellers of a satisfactory building and pest inspection before 5pm. Shortly after 5pm, the sellers exercised their right to terminate the contract. The buyers then sent a satisfactory notice of inspection after receiving the termination notice from the sellers.

The central legal issue the court had to decide was whether the notices were to be taken to have been received in the same order on the next business day. The court examined the standard form contract, which stipulated that notices given after 5pm were to be considered as received on the next business day. The Simpson argued that this provision did not apply to the termination notice. However, the court held that the provision applied equally to all notices under the contract, including the termination notice. As a result, the termination notice was deemed to have been received by the Simpson on the next business day, and the contract was validly terminated.

In reaching its decision, the court found that the standard form contract's provision for the timing of notice receipt applied to all notices, including the termination notice. The court noted that there was no factual dispute between the parties regarding the timing of the notices. The court held that the Simpson's argument that the provision should not apply to the termination notice was without merit. The court concluded that the Simpson had failed to provide the required notice of a satisfactory building and pest inspection by 5pm, and the contract was therefore validly terminated. The Simpson's application was dismissed, and the defendant was ordered to remove the caveat from the property. The Simpson were also ordered to pay the defendant's costs of the proceeding.