Soliman v Mamouney

In *Soliman v Mamouney* [1992] NSWCA 233, the New South Wales Court of Appeal considered a dispute between a vendor and a purchaser concerning the sale of a property. The purchaser sought to terminate the contract of sale, alleging that the vendor had failed to comply with a condition precedent.

The central legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether the vendor's conduct constituted a breach of the contract, thereby entitling the purchaser to terminate. Specifically, the court had to determine if the vendor had taken all reasonable steps to fulfil a condition precedent within the timeframe stipulated by the contract.

The Court of Appeal found that the vendor had not taken all reasonable steps to satisfy the condition precedent. Applying the principles of contract law, the court held that where a party has a contractual obligation to take all reasonable steps to fulfil a condition precedent, and fails to do so, the other party is entitled to terminate the contract. The court emphasised that the onus was on the vendor to demonstrate that they had indeed taken all reasonable steps.

Consequently, the Court of Appeal dismissed the vendor's appeal and affirmed the primary judge's decision, which had found in favour of the purchaser and allowed them to terminate the contract.