New Zealand Tenancy Bonds Ltd v Mooney

Last updated

New Zealand Tenancy Bonds Ltd v Mooney
Coat of arms of New Zealand.svg
Court Court of Appeal of New Zealand, Wellington
Decided12 December 1985
Citation(s)[1986] 1 NZLR 280
Court membership
Judge(s) sitting Woodhouse P, Richardson J, McCarthy J

New Zealand Tenancy Bonds Ltd v Mooney [1986] 1 NZLR 280 is an often cited case regarding misrepresentation and whether the misrepresentation was "essential" in order for a party to be able to cancel the contract under the Contractual Remedies Act 1979. [1]

Contents

Background

New Zealand Tenancy Bonds made an unconditional offer to purchase Mooney's Christchurch property which was accepted the same day. The sale agreement specified that the deposit was to be paid "immediately on acceptance of this offer". The sale agreement also stated that the payment of the deposit was "strictly of the essence of the contract".

However, the purchaser waited 53 days before paying the deposit. The vendor, not happy with the delay, cancelled the contract, and refused to continue with the sale to the purchaser.

Decision

The court ruled that as the time for the payment of the deposit was an essential term of the contract, and as this term was not complied with, the vendor was entitled to cancel the sale agreement under the Contractual Remedies Act [1979].

Richardson J stated: "non-payment in the circumstances of the case constituted a fundamental breach entitling the vendor to cancel the contract in terms of s 7(3) and (4) of the Contractual Remedies Act 1979."

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Lease</span> Contractual agreement in which an assets owner lets someone else use it in exchange for payment

A lease is a contractual arrangement calling for the user to pay the owner for the use of an asset. Property, buildings and vehicles are common assets that are leased. Industrial or business equipment are also leased. Basically a lease agreement is a contract between two parties: the lessor and the lessee. The lessor is the legal owner of the asset, while the lessee obtains the right to use the asset in return for regular rental payments. The lessee also agrees to abide by various conditions regarding their use of the property or equipment. For example, a person leasing a car may agree to the condition that the car will only be used for personal use.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Misrepresentation</span> Untrue statement in contract negotiations

In common law jurisdictions, a misrepresentation is a false or misleading statement of fact made during negotiations by one party to another, the statement then inducing that other party to enter into a contract. The misled party may normally rescind the contract, and sometimes may be awarded damages as well.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Canadian contract law</span>

Canadian contract law is composed of two parallel systems: a common law framework outside Québec and a civil law framework within Québec. Outside Québec, Canadian contract law is derived from English contract law, though it has developed distinctly since Canadian Confederation in 1867. While Québecois contract law was originally derived from that which existed in France at the time of Québec's annexation into the British Empire, it was overhauled and codified first in the Civil Code of Lower Canada and later in the current Civil Code of Quebec, which codifies most elements of contract law as part of its provisions on the broader law of obligations. Individual common law provinces have codified certain contractual rules in a Sale of Goods Act, resembling equivalent statutes elsewhere in the Commonwealth. As most aspects of contract law in Canada are the subject of provincial jurisdiction under the Canadian Constitution, contract law may differ even between the country's common law provinces and territories. Conversely; as the law regarding bills of exchange and promissory notes, trade and commerce, maritime law, and banking among other related areas is governed by federal law under Section 91 of the Constitution Act, 1867; aspects of contract law pertaining to these topics are harmonised between Québec and the common law provinces.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">English contract law</span> Law of contracts in England and Wales

English contract law is the body of law that regulates legally binding agreements in England and Wales. With its roots in the lex mercatoria and the activism of the judiciary during the industrial revolution, it shares a heritage with countries across the Commonwealth, from membership in the European Union, continuing membership in Unidroit, and to a lesser extent the United States. Any agreement that is enforceable in court is a contract. A contract is a voluntary obligation, contrasting to the duty to not violate others rights in tort or unjust enrichment. English law places a high value on ensuring people have truly consented to the deals that bind them in court, so long as they comply with statutory and human rights.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Contract</span> Legally binding document establishing rights and duties between parties

A contract is an agreement that specifies certain legally enforceable rights and obligations pertaining to two or more mutually agreeing parties. A contract typically involves the transfer of goods, services, money, or a promise to transfer any of those at a future date. In the event of a breach of contract, the injured party may seek judicial remedies such as damages or rescission. A binding agreement between actors in international law is known as a treaty.

Shipbuilding contract, which is the contract for the complete construction of a ship, concerns the sales of future goods, so the property could not pass title at the time when the contract is concluded. The aim of shipbuilding contract is to regulate a substantial and complex project which the builders and buyers assume long-term obligations to other and bear significant commercial risks.

'The Sale and purchase of ship' is one of the important aspects of the shipping industry. It involves vast amounts of money and requires different kinds of professional knowledge, such as knowledge of particular type of ship and its function, legal knowledge as well as dealing and bargaining knowledge. In order to reduce the number of disputes and smoothen the sale and purchase procedure, normally the shipowner (seller) and the buyer will appoint brokers as middlemen to handle the transaction. There are three main stages for the sale and purchase of a ship which include (1) the negotiation and contract stage, (2) the inspections stage and (3) the completion. From different stages, it includes different important issues and regulations. In following, the article will discuss all these stages of Sale and Purchase of a ship and all the important elements.

Dimmock v Hallett (1866–67) LR 2 Ch App 21 is an English contract law case, concerning misrepresentation.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">South African contract law</span> Law about agreements between two or more parties

South African contract law is "essentially a modernized version of the Roman-Dutch law of contract", and is rooted in canon and Roman laws. In the broadest definition, a contract is an agreement two or more parties enter into with the serious intention of creating a legal obligation. Contract law provides a legal framework within which persons can transact business and exchange resources, secure in the knowledge that the law will uphold their agreements and, if necessary, enforce them. The law of contract underpins private enterprise in South Africa and regulates it in the interest of fair dealing.

The South African law of sale is an area of the legal system in that country that describes rules applicable to a contract of sale, generally described as a contract whereby one person agrees to deliver to another the free possession of a thing in return for a price in money.

<i>Wakelin v R H & E A Jackson Ltd</i>

Wakelin v R H & E A Jackson LTD (1984) 2 NZCPR 195 is an often cited case of the High Court of New Zealand regarding misstatements. The judgement ruled that merely being silent on an important fact can be construed as a misstatement in itself.

<i>Young v Hunt</i>

Young v Hunt [1984] 2 NZLR 80 is a case that establishes in New Zealand case law that a contract can not simply be cancelled due to misrepresentation, unless that misrepresentation was a breach of an "essential" term of the contract.

<i>Powierza v Daley</i>

Powierza v Daley [1985] 1 NZLR 558 is an important New Zealand case involving where an inquiry about an offer, is just that, or whether instead it is a counteroffer. The legal distinction between the two is important, as an "inquiry" still leaves the original offer live, whereas a "counteroffer" cancels the previous offer.

<i>Worsdale v Polglase</i>

Worsdale v Polglase [1981] 1 NZLR 722 is a cited case in New Zealand regarding relief under the Contractual Remedies Act 1979 where a contract is repudiated by one of the parties.

<i>Garratt v Ikeda</i>

Garratt v Ikeda [2002] 1 NZLR 577 is a cited case in New Zealand regarding where a contract is cancelled under the Contractual Remedies Act 1979, if the deposit has not been paid, it is still payable, despite section 8(3)(a).

<i>Simanke v Liu</i> High Court case regarding New Zealand contract law

Simanke v Liu (1994) 2 NZ ConvC 191,888 is a cited case in New Zealand regarding cancellation of a contract under the Contractual Remedies Act. It held that any deposit in excess of a customary deposit, in this case 10%, is refundable to the purchaser.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Contractual Remedies Act 1979</span> Act of Parliament in New Zealand

The Contractual Remedies Act 1979 was a statute of the New Zealand Parliament. It provided remedies in respect of misrepresentation, repudiation or breach of contract in New Zealand. It was repealed by the Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017.

<i>Thompson v Vincent</i>

Thompson v Vincent [2001] 3 NZLR 355 is a cited case in New Zealand confirming that where a party has cancelled a contract on unjustifiable grounds, can legally cancel the contract if justifiable grounds are later discovered.

In Bulgaria, the law of obligations is set out by the Obligations and Contracts Act (OCA). According to article 20a, OCA contracts shall have the force of law for the parties that conclude them.

Wells v Devani [2019] UKSC 4 is an English contract law case, concerning agreements to agree.

References

  1. Chetwin, Maree; Graw, Stephen; Tiong, Raymond (2006). An introduction to the Law of Contract in New Zealand (4th ed.). Thomson Brookers. p. 220. ISBN   0-86472-555-8.