Rebenta Pty Ltd v Wise

[2009] NSWCA 212

NSW Court of Appeal

View on CaseLaw

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Contract
2. › Construction and interpretation
3. › Conditions precedent
4. › Whether written notification required for satisfaction of condition
5. › Meaning of 'written consent from' a body
6. › Whether 'from' identifies source or requires notification
1. Contract
2. › Rectification
3. › Common intention not embodied in written agreement
4. › Whether claim for rectification would have succeeded
5. › Whether loss incurred through foregone right to terminate
1. Estoppel
2. › Estoppel by convention
3. › Distinction from promissory estoppel
4. › Common understanding or arrangement between parties
5. › Variation of contractual condition
6. › Whether parties conducted themselves on basis of common assumption
1. Tort
2. › Negligence
3. › Professional negligence
4. › Solicitor's duty of care
5. › Failure to advise on right to terminate
6. › Causation
7. › Loss of opportunity
8. › Whether negligence caused loss where right to terminate did not exist

Quick Take

The word 'from' in a definition of consent as 'written consent from [a body]' identifies the source of consent rather than imposing a requirement of notification; the condition is satisfied by the grant of consent reduced to writing, without notification to the applicant. An estoppel by convention may be established on the basis of a mutual consensus between parties as to the meaning or operation of a contractual provision, without requiring the elements of promissory estoppel (representation and reliance). An intermediate appellate court is entitled to decline to address issues not necessary to the disposition, having regard to the limits of its resources, its workload, the interests of other litigants, and the risk of error on hypothetical issues.