Street v Ladini

The applicants, Street, sought to enforce an oral agreement made with Ladini, the respondent, in relation to an option to purchase their real property. The option fee was $100,000, and the applicants claimed that there was an additional oral term that Ladini would pay $5,000 per month to the applicants during the option period. The applicants also claimed that Ladini was aware of their special disadvantage due to their age and/or infirmity or a lack of assistance or explanation about the transaction, and that the transaction was grossly improvident. The respondent argued that there was no enforceable oral agreement, and that the applicants could not show that the transaction was grossly improvident. The court was required to determine whether the applicants could enforce the oral agreement and whether the transaction was grossly improvident. The court found that there was no enforceable oral agreement as there was no evidence of an intention to be bound by the oral term. The court also found that the applicants could not show that the transaction was grossly improvident, as they had not provided sufficient evidence of their special disadvantage or the improvidence of the transaction. The applicants' application was dismissed.