A right of first refusal that uses a defined term for the purchase price, where that defined term bears no relation to the value of the property and would produce an uncommercial result, may be construed as requiring purchase at the price the vendor would otherwise sell to another buyer, particularly where the definition is subject to a 'contrary intention' proviso. A right of first refusal does not create an equitable interest in the subject property and is not an 'encumbrance' within statutory prohibitions on encumbering licensed market stands. If a right of first refusal at a fixed undervalue would effectively preclude any sale of the property forever, it may be void as a restraint on alienation.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 15 later cases that cite this judgment.
2 of the 15 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.