Schmidt v Holland

Last updated

Schmidt v Holland
Coat of arms of New Zealand.svg
Court High Court of New Zealand
Full case nameSchmidt v Holland
Decided20 December 1982
Citation(s)[1982] 2 NZLR 406
Court membership
Judge(s) sittingHardie Boys J

Schmidt v Holland [1982] 2 NZLR 406 is a cited case in New Zealand regarding the issue of notice of cancellation of a contract, where a contract has been breached. [1] [2]

Contents

Background

The Schmidts agreed to purchase the Holland's property. Later, the Schmidt's decided to buy someone else's property, and as a result the Schmidt's indicated to the Hollands, that they did not plan to purchase their property.

As a consequence, the Holland's treated their sales contract as being cancelled, and later sold their property to a 3rd party, and sued the Schmidts for the loss in the resale.

The Schmidts disputed liability, on the basis that as the Hollands had not actioned the formality of informing them that they had accepted their repudiation of the contract, they could not treat the contract as legally cancelled.

Decision

The High Court of New Zealand ruled that as the Schmidt's were not formally advised by the Holland's that they had cancelled the contract, they were not liable for the loss on resale. At the same time, a sympathetic Hardie Boys J stated "The result is hard on the Hollands, for they were not at fault, and their position could so easily have been protected".

Footnote: The courts have subsequently shown willingness to avoid such rulings, such as in Chatfield v Jones (1990) 3 NZLR 285

Related Research Articles

<i>Couch v Branch Investments (1969) Ltd</i>

Couch v Branch Investments (1969) Limited [1980] 2 NZLR 314 is an often cited case regarding the temporary forbearance of taking legal action on enforcing a debt as being consideration to enter into a new contract with the creditor. It reinforces the English case of Callisher v Bischoffsheim (1870) LR 5 QB 449.

<i>Field v Fitton</i>

Field v Fitton [1988] 1 NZLR 482 is a cited New Zealand case regarding privity of contract.

<i>Moyes & Groves Ltd v Radiation New Zealand Ltd</i> Case in New Zealand

Moyes & Groves Ltd v Radiation New Zealand Ltd [1982] 1 NZLR 368 is a cited case in New Zealand regarding whether acts or forbearances in performance of an existing duty are legally enforceable. It reinforces the English case of Hartley v Ponsonby (1857) 7 E & B 872; 119 ER 1471.

<i>Chatfield v Jones</i>

Chatfield v Jones [1990] 3 NZLR 285 is a cited case in New Zealand regarding the issue of notice of cancellation of a contract, where a contract has been breached.

<i>Pendergrast v Chapman</i>

Pendergrast v Chapman [1988] 2 NZLR 177 is a cited case in New Zealand regarding the consequences of cancellation of a contract under the Contractual Remedies Act 1979.

<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>A M Bisley & Co Ltd v Thompson</i>

A M Bisley & Co Ltd v Thompson [1982] 2 NZLR 696 is a cited case in New Zealand regarding express terms in a contract. It highlights one of the exceptions to the parol evidence rule, that is contracts that are partly written, and partly oral contracts.

<i>Shotter v Westpac Banking Corp</i>

Shotter v Westpac Banking Corp [1988] 2 NZLR 316 is a cited case in New Zealand regarding the definition of what is a mistake under the Contractual Mistakes Act.

<i>Boat Park Ltd v Hutchinson</i>

Boat Park Ltd v Hutchinson [1999] 2 NZLR 74 is a cited case in New Zealand regarding what evidence is admissible when considering the express terms of a contract. It follows the English case of the Financial Services Compensation Scheme.

<i>Moreton v Montrose Ltd (in liq)</i>

Moreton v Montrose Ltd (in liq) [1986] 2 NZLR 496 is a cited case in New Zealand regarding where a condition in conditional contract is for the sole benefit of one party, the condition can be unilaterally waived by that party. >

<i>Globe Holdings v Floratos</i>

Globe Holdings v Floratos [1998] 3 NZLR 331 is a cited case in New Zealand regarding where a condition in conditional contract is for the sole benefit of one party, the condition can be unilaterally waived by that party.

<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>Jolly v Palmer</i>

Jolly v Palmer [1985] 1 NZLR 658 is a cited case in New Zealand regarding the legal enforceability of a contract where there is a breach of a stipulation.

<i>MacIndoe v Mainzeal Group Ltd</i>

MacIndoe v Mainzeal Group Ltd [1991] 3 NZLR 273 is a cited case in New Zealand regarding the legal enforceability of a contract where there is a breach of a stipulation.

<i>Gregory v Rangitikei</i>

Gregory v Rangitikei [1995] 2 NZLR 208, (1994) 6 TCLR 199 is a cited case in New Zealand regarding the sale of property by tender, confirming that an offer inviting tenders to be submitted for the purchase of something did not amount to an offer capable of acceptance to sell that property, but instead merely amounted to an invitation to treat. It reinforces the English case of Spencer v Harding (1870) LR 5 CP 561. However the Court also ruled that there was a breach of the Fair Trading Act (1986).

<i>Ansley v Prospectus Nominees Unlimited</i>

Ansley v Prospectus Nominees Unlimited [2004] NZCA 14; [2004] 2 NZLR 590; (2004) 5 NZ ConvC 193,914; (2004) 5 NZCPR 330; (2004) 10 TCLR 952 is a cited case in New Zealand regarding whether a party to a conditional contract can treat that contract as ended if they are responsible for the failure of the stipulated condition.

<i>Ross v Henderson</i> Cited case in New Zealand

Ross v Henderson [1977] 2 NZLR 458 is a cited case in New Zealand regarding illegal contracts that were later upheld that the Illegal Contracts Act 1970 had the power to validate despite the fact that another legal enactment "deemed to be unlawful and shall have no effect".

<i>Catley v Herbert</i>

Catley v Herbert [1988] 1 NZLR 606 is a cited case in New Zealand regarding whether a contract illegal under law, can be subsequently validated under the Illegal Contracts Act 1970.

<i>Cox & Coxon Ltd v Leipst</i>

Cox & Coxon Ltd v Leipst [1999] 2 NZLR 15; (1999) 6 NZBLC 102,666; (1998) 8 TCLR 516 is a cited case in New Zealand regarding the award of damages for "expectation loss" under the Fair Trading Act 1986.

<i>Frost & Sutcliffe v Tuiara</i>

Frost & Sutcliffe v Tuiara [2004] 1 NZLR 782; (2003) 10 TCLR 912 is a cited case in New Zealand regarding whether a party owes another party concurrent duties in contract and in tort.

References

  1. ↑ Chetwin, Maree; Graw, Stephen; Tiong, Raymond (2006). An introduction to the Law of Contract in New Zealand (4th ed.). Thomson Brookers. p. [ page needed ]. ISBN   0-86472-555-8.
  2. ↑ Walker, Campbell (2004). Butterworths Student Companion Contract (4th ed.). LexisNexis. p. 201. ISBN   0-408-71770-X.


This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.