Stipic v Rogriguez

In *Stipic v Rogriguez*, the New South Wales Court of Appeal considered a dispute between the parties concerning a contract for the sale of land. The primary issue before the court was whether the vendor had validly terminated the contract due to the purchaser's alleged breach.

The court was required to determine whether the purchaser's failure to pay the deposit by the stipulated date constituted a repudiatory breach of the contract, thereby entitling the vendor to terminate. Further, the court had to consider whether the vendor's subsequent conduct amounted to a waiver of any right to terminate, or if the vendor had affirmed the contract.

The Court of Appeal held that the purchaser's failure to pay the deposit on the due date was not a repudiatory breach. The court reasoned that time was not of the essence for the payment of the deposit, and the vendor had not served a notice to complete that would have made time of the essence. Consequently, the vendor's purported termination of the contract was wrongful. The court applied principles relating to the essentiality of contractual terms and the requirements for valid termination of a contract for sale of land.

The Court of Appeal allowed the purchaser's appeal, set aside the orders of the primary judge, and ordered that the contract be affirmed. The vendor was ordered to pay the purchaser's costs of the appeal.