Tekely v Pryce

The appeal concerned a dispute arising from a contract between Tekely (the appellant) and Pryce (the respondent). The core of the disagreement involved allegations of breach of contract, specifically whether the respondent had breached an essential or implied term of the agreement and whether reasonable notice had been given for its termination. The matter was heard in the Court of Appeal of New South Wales.

The Court of Appeal was required to determine whether the termination of the contract by the respondent was wrongful. This involved assessing whether the respondent's actions constituted a breach of an essential term, or alternatively, a breach of an implied term of the contract. A further issue was whether the notice of termination provided by the respondent was reasonable in the circumstances.

The Court of Appeal found that the respondent had not breached an essential term of the contract. Furthermore, it was held that the notice of termination given by the respondent was reasonable. Consequently, the termination was not wrongful. The appeal was dismissed with costs.