| Worsdale v Polglase | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Court | High Court of New Zealand |
| Full case name | Worsdale v Polglase |
| Decided | 25 June 1981 |
| Citation(s) | [1981] 1 NZLR 722 |
| Court membership | |
| Judge(s) sitting | Davison CJ |
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. [1] [2]
The Worsdales entered into a contract in 1980 to purchase the Polglases' Paraparaumu home for $60,000, paying $6,000 deposit.
To finance their purchase, the Worsdales were expecting $20,000 from a business transaction, plus a further $28,000 from the sale of a property. However, 21 days before the date of settlement, both these funds had not materialized, and as a result, they advised the vendors that they had repudiated the contract.
On the following day, the vendors advised the Worsdales that they had now cancelled the contract, and on the same day, resold the property to another party for $60,000.
The Worsdales sought relief from the courts for their deposit of $6,000 that was forfeited
The court held that a deposit of 10% was customary, and refused to grant any relief here for a forfeited deposit of 10%.
In law, conveyancing is the transfer of legal title of real property from one person to another, or the granting of an encumbrance such as a mortgage or a lien. A typical conveyancing transaction has two major phases: the exchange of contracts and completion.
Johnson v Agnew [1980] AC 367 is a landmark English contract law case on the date for assessing damages. Lord Wilberforce decided that the date appropriate is the date of breach, or when a contracting party could reasonably be aware of a breach.
Hart v O'Connor [1985] UKPC 1 is an important case in New Zealand, also relevant for English contract law, regarding mental capacity to enter into contract as well as regarding unconscionable bargains, which made it as far as the Privy Council.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Gallagher v Young [1981] 1 NZLR 734 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.
Boulder Consolidated Ltd v Tangaere [1980] 1 NZLR 560 is a cited court case in New Zealand regarding the objective approach to contract formation.
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.
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.
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. >
King v Wilkinson (1994) 2 NZConvC 191,828 is a cited case in New Zealand regarding where a mistake is known to one party when a contract is formed, under section 6(1)(a)(i) of the Contractual Mistakes Act 1977.
Ware v Johnson [1984] 2 NZLR 518 is a cited case in New Zealand regarding where both parties entering into a contract make the same mistake when a contract is formed, under section 6(1)(a)(ii) of the Contractual Mistakes Act 1977.
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).
National Westminster Finance NZ Ltd v South Pacific Rent-a-Car Ltd [1985] 1 NZLR 646 is a cited case in New Zealand regarding the validation of illegal contracts under the Illegal Contracts Act 1970.
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.
Knyvett v Christchurch Casinos Ltd [1999] 2 NZLR 559 is a cited case in New Zealand regarding whether a contract illegal under statute, can be subsequently validated under the Illegal Contracts Act 1970.
Young v New Bay Holdings Ltd (1998) 3 NZ ConvC 192,808 is a cited case in New Zealand regarding satisfying the element of detriment required under promissory estoppel.
 | This article relating to case law in New Zealand is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it. |