Vujanovic v Musumeci

The case of Vujanovic v Musumeci involved a dispute over a contract for the sale of residential property in Bayview Heights. The plaintiffs, Vujanovic, entered into a contract with the defendants, Musumeci, to purchase a property under the condition that finance would be obtained. The contract specified that the purchasers were required to provide written notification of finance by a certain date. When the specified date arrived, the purchasers had not notified the vendors of the finance, which entitled the vendors to terminate the contract. However, the purchasers attempted to affirm the contract after the vendors had already terminated it. The issue before the court was whether the vendors had the right to terminate the contract before the purchasers affirmed it.

The court considered whether the failure to provide written notification of finance by the purchasers was a breach of the contract that entitled the vendors to terminate. The court noted that the contract explicitly required written notice and that the failure to provide such notice constituted a breach. However, the court also considered the effect of the purchasers' subsequent affirmation of the contract. The court concluded that the vendors had the right to terminate the contract before the purchasers affirmed it, as the breach of the contract by the purchasers entitled the vendors to terminate, and the subsequent affirmation did not affect the vendors' right to terminate.

The court ordered specific performance of the contract, directing the vendors to complete the sale of the property within six weeks unless another date was agreed upon. The court also ordered the vendors to pay the purchasers' costs of the proceedings, subject to any written submissions suggesting a different order. The parties were granted liberty to apply to the court for further orders.

This decision underscores the importance of strict compliance with contractual terms, particularly in relation to the notification of finance in property sale contracts. The court's emphasis on the need for written notification highlights the necessity for purchasers to adhere to the specific requirements of the contract to avoid potential termination by the vendors.