[2004] HCATrans 540
IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Office of the Registry
Sydney No S442 of 2003
B e t w e e n -
LISLE DENIS SNELL
Applicant
and
WILLIAM WINTON SANDERS
Respondent
Pronouncement of orders by consent
McHUGH J
KIRBY J
CALLINAN J
TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS
AT SYDNEY ON FRIDAY, 10 DECEMBER 2004, AT 9.16 AM
Copyright in the High Court of Australia
McHUGH J: In this matter the parties have agreed to orders. The Court, by consent, orders:
1. The application for special leave to appeal, filed on 1 August 2003 is dismissed.
2. The applicant is to pay the respondent’s costs.
I publish the consent order.
AT 9.17 AM THE MATTER WAS CONCLUDED
- AGLC
- Snell v Sanders [2004] HCATrans 540
- Case
- [2004] HCATrans 540
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issue before the High Court was whether the vendor, Sanders, was entitled to forfeit the deposit paid by the purchaser, Snell, under the terms of the contract, notwithstanding that the contract had been terminated due to the vendor's own default. Specifically, the court had to consider the interaction between a forfeiture clause and a termination clause within the contract, and whether the former could operate independently of the latter.
The High Court, by majority, held that the vendor was not entitled to forfeit the deposit. The majority reasoned that the forfeiture clause was intended to operate in circumstances where the purchaser defaulted, not where the vendor was in breach. To allow forfeiture in this instance would be to permit the vendor to benefit from their own wrong, which was contrary to fundamental principles of contract law. The court applied the principle that a party cannot rely on a contractual provision to their advantage when their own conduct has caused the event upon which that provision would operate.
The High Court ordered that the deposit paid by Snell be returned to him.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.