Under contract of sale dated April 30, 2013, the purchasers, Chris and Marie, agreed to purchase a two bedroom home unit from Simon, the vendor. Max was the conveyancer acting for the vendor. Completion date was June 15, with time the essence of the contract.
Due to problems in obtaining finance, Chris and Marie phoned Max’s office on June 8, requesting a week’s extension of the completion date. Max was not available but the secretary said “I think that will be alright, but I’ll get instructions.”
On June 16, Chris and Marie received a letter from Max advising that the contract had been rescinded. The following day, Max refused a tender of the purchase price from the ...view middle of the document...
Therefore, it is not possible for the purchasers to raise a promissory estoppel to stop the vendor from rescinding the contract.
In conclusion, Christ and Marie will not able to raise the promissory estoppel in order for the vendor to sell them the property.
2. Would your answer be any different if the purchasers had spoken to Max personally and were told “No problem, I know the vendors are in no hurry”, while in fact he had obtained no instructions from them on the matter.
Yes. If the purchasers had spoken to Max personally and were in fact received a clear promise from Max, the purchasers would able to give raise of a promissory estoppel to stop Max from rescinding the contract and the vendor would require to sell them the property according to the contract of sale. Even Max had obtained no instructions from the vendors, as the conveyancer for the vendor, Max would have the authority to act on behalf of the vendor itself.
Roger is in business selling high level office equipment. The following events took place:
1 May: Roger was speaking to his brother, Andy, who has an office in Sydney, about a new printer that Roger had in stock.
Andy: “How much is it?”
Roger: “The lowest price I would consider is $1000.”
Andy: “I’ll take it.”
Roger: “OK, you can have it for $1400.”
Andy: “But you said $1000. We now have a contract for that price.”
Roger: “We don’t have a contract. The price is $1400. I only have one in stock, but I’ll give you first option at $1400 if you let me know in person by 6 May.”
2 May: Andy told his friend, Maria, that he intended to buy the printer. Later that day, Maria told Roger that Andy intended to buy the printer.
3 May: At 1:00pm, Roger, forgetting his conversation of 2 May with Maria, offered to sell the printer to Jim for $1300. Jim replied “If you don’t hear from me by 5:00pm today, you can assume I accept”.
Roger did not respond to this. Jim did not contact Roger again that day.
At 4:00pm, Roger sent an email to Jim promising to also give Jim a large quantity of free paper if
Jim agreed to buy the printer. Jim read that email at 6pm.
4 May: Roger changed his mind about selling to Andy. As he could not contact Andy by telephone, Roger telephoned Maria and asked her to tell Andy that Roger would no longer sell to him.
5 May: Maria told Andy that Roger did not want to sell him the printer. Andy was not sure whether to believe her.
Andy phoned Roger agreeing to buy the printer. During their conversation Andy said:
“1. We had a contract for the printer at $1000 on 1 May;
2. If not, then we had a contract for the printer at $1400 on 2 May;
3. If not, then we now have a contract for the printer at $1400.”
Roger is confused and seeks your advice.
Advise Roger whether he has a contract to sell the printer to Andy or Jim.
There are four parties to the case which is Roger, Andy, Jim and Maria. On 1 May, Roger is trying to sell Andy his printer and Andy assumed that Roger is...