Webster and Another v Lampard

Webster and Another (appellants) appealed to the High Court of Australia against a decision of the Supreme Court of South Australia concerning a dispute over a contract for the sale of land. The appellants sought to enforce a written agreement for the sale of a property, while the respondent, Lampard, sought to resile from the agreement, alleging it was void for uncertainty.

The central legal issue before the High Court was whether the contract for the sale of land was sufficiently certain to be enforceable. Specifically, the court had to determine if the description of the land in the contract was adequate to identify the subject matter of the sale with the necessary degree of certainty required for a binding agreement.

Toohey J, in his judgment, considered the principles of contractual certainty, particularly in relation to land descriptions. His Honour referred to established legal principles that require a contract for the sale of land to identify the subject matter with sufficient certainty, either by its own terms or by reference to external criteria. In this instance, the description of the land in the contract was found to be ambiguous and lacking the necessary specificity to identify the particular parcel of land intended to be sold. Consequently, the contract was deemed void for uncertainty.