Thomas v Ducret

The High Court of Australia considered the dispute between Thomas and Ducret concerning the validity of a contract for the sale of land. The central issue revolved around whether the contract, which was not in writing, was enforceable under the relevant legislation governing land transactions.

The court was required to determine whether the agreement for the sale of land satisfied the requirements of section 54A of the Conveyancing Act 1919 (NSW), which mandates that contracts for the sale or disposition of land must be in writing and signed by the party to be charged or their agent. A further issue was whether the doctrine of part performance could be invoked to overcome the absence of a written agreement.

The High Court held that the agreement was not enforceable as it did not comply with the writing requirements of section 54A. The court reasoned that the doctrine of part performance, which requires acts unequivocally referable to the existence of a contract, was not established on the facts. The conduct relied upon by the plaintiff was not sufficiently indicative of a concluded agreement for the sale of land.

Consequently, the High Court dismissed the appeal and affirmed the decision of the lower court, finding that no enforceable contract for the sale of land existed between the parties.