Vlahos & Vlahos

In *Vlahos & Vlahos*, the husband applied to the court for an order for the sale of a property on an "as is" basis, citing urgency due to a mortgagee default notice. The property, registered in the wife's sole name and for which she is the registered owner-builder, was subject to previous consent orders for sale. The wife opposed the "as is" sale, expressing concern about potential liability arising from a recently discovered water leakage issue, and sought an adjournment to obtain professional advice on rectification works.

The central legal issue before the court was whether to order the sale of the property on an "as is" basis, as sought by the husband, or to grant the wife's request for an adjournment to investigate and potentially rectify a water leakage issue. This involved balancing the husband's desire to avoid a mortgagee sale and the wife's concerns about potential future liability as the registered owner-builder.

Hartnett J acknowledged the history of disagreements and delays concerning the property's sale. While the husband sought an urgent sale to avert further mortgagee action, the wife argued that selling "as is" would expose her to significant liability due to the water leakage. The court recognised the wife's need to obtain professional advice regarding the water issue and its potential rectification. Consequently, the court adjourned the matter, making specific orders regarding the funding and provision of a building surveyor's report, with the ultimate allocation of costs to be determined at trial.