Carrapetta v Rado

[2012] NSWCA 202

NSW Court of Appeal

View on CaseLaw

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Vendor and Purchaser
2. › Completion of contract
3. › Time for completion
4. › Time of the essence
5. › Notice to complete
6. › When notice may be given by vendor
7. › Whether vendor in default at time of giving notice
8. › Reservation of rights regarding contractual amendments
9. › Whether reservation of rights constitutes default
1. Vendor and Purchaser
2. › Completion of contract
3. › Settlement statement
4. › Status and purpose of settlement statement
5. › Whether delivery of settlement statement containing erroneous calculation affects validity of prior notice to complete
6. › Whether settlement statement constitutes adoption of particular contractual construction

Quick Take

A vendor who reserves rights regarding disputed contractual amendments while affirming reliance on the contract terms is not thereby 'in default' so as to be precluded from serving a notice to complete. A settlement statement delivered after a notice to complete that contains an erroneous calculation does not retrospectively invalidate the notice. Settlement statements are matters of practical convenience, not contractual obligation, and courts should be slow to treat them as unequivocal adoptions of a particular contractual construction.