Bellevue Station Pty Ltd v Consolidated Pastoral Company Pty Ltd & Anor

[2024] QCA 47

Queensland Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Contract
2. › Construction and interpretation
3. › Implied terms
4. › Business efficacy and necessity tests
5. › Whether implied obligation on continuing party to enter into agreement with incoming purchaser
6. › Whether term necessary to give business efficacy to agreement
7. › Codelfa Construction Pty Ltd v State Rail Authority of New South Wales (1982) 149 CLR 337
8. › BP Refinery (Westernport) Pty Ltd v Hastings Shire Council (1977) 52 ALJR 20
1. Contract
2. › Formation of contractual relations
3. › Vagueness and uncertainty
4. › Agreement to agree
5. › Whether promise to enter into 'similar arrangement' void for uncertainty
1. Contract
2. › Parties
3. › Rights and liabilities of third parties
4. › Statutory third-party beneficiary
5. › Whether promise for benefit of incoming purchaser within meaning of s 55
6. › Property Law Act 1974 (Qld), s 55
1. Contract
2. › Assignment
3. › Whether rights under agreement capable of assignment
4. › Whether assignor had anything to assign after disposing of land

Quick Take

A clause in a give and take or similar neighbour agreement requiring a disposing party to have an incoming purchaser "enter into a similar arrangement" does not impliedly oblige the continuing party to enter that arrangement, and the phrase "similar arrangement" may be void for uncertainty.