The Facts

Property sale contract requires payment of deposit on 4th month after contract date

On 4 April 2019, a purchaser and vendors exchanged contracts for the sale of a residential property in Vaucluse, Sydney. The purchase price was $4,830,000 with a 5% deposit.

Special condition 38 of the contract provided that the deposit was payable in two instalments.

The first instalment of $150,000 was payable on exchange, while the second instalment of $91,500 was payable "on the 4th month after the contract date".

Vendors and purchaser disagree on final date for payment of deposit

On 1 July 2019, the purchaser travelled with his family to Greece, believing that under special condition 38 he had until 31 August to pay the second instalment of the deposit.

In July, the vendors' agent sent two emails to the purchaser regarding payment of the second instalment. One required payment "by or before 5 August" and the other required payment "on or before 4 August".

The purchaser said that he did not see these emails until 1 August, the same date that he had sent an email to the vendors' agent saying: ".with regards to the second part of the deposit I'm currently overseas and have been for the past 5 weeks. However I will be returning on 6th August and will be depositing the balance there shortly after."

On 2 August, the vendors' agent replied saying that payment was due on 4 August. However, the purchaser was in transit from Greece to Australia and said that he did not see the email until he landed in Abu Dhabi at midnight on 5 August.

Vendors terminate contract for non-payment of deposit and purchaser seeks order for completion of sale

Meanwhile, on 5 August at 6pm, the vendors' solicitor issued a notice terminating the contract due to the purchaser's failure to pay the second instalment of the deposit by 4 August.

The purchaser returned to Australia on 6 August.

On 7 August, he paid the second instalment of $91,500 to the vendors' agent and notified the vendors' solicitor of his belief that the contract was still on foot, due to the defective notice of termination.

The vendors' solicitor responded that the contract had been terminated on 5 August and that the $241,500 deposit paid by the purchaser was forfeited.

The purchaser commenced proceedings in the NSW Supreme Court, seeking an order that the vendors complete the sale.

case a - The case for the purchaser

case b - The case for the vendors

  • Prior to exchanging contracts for sale, I spoke with the vendors' agent, telling him that I would pay the 5% deposit in two instalments, with the first instalment being paid on exchange and the second instalment being paid any time after four months. He replied that the vendors weren't too concerned about the timing of the second instalment of the deposit, as long as they ended up receiving a 5% deposit.
  • The following day, the vendors' agent rang me to say that he had spoken to the vendors, and that the vendors had accepted my offer. The agent told me to ask my solicitor to put the terms in writing.
  • On 4 April, my solicitor sent the vendors' agent special condition 38 for inclusion in the contract, specifying that the second half of the deposit was payable "on the 4th month after the contract date".
  • Under special condition 38, I was not required to pay the second instalment of the deposit until 31 August 2019. This was because the first month after the date of the contract was May, the second month after the date of the contract was June, the third month after the date of the contract was July and the fourth month after the date of the contract was August. "On" meant at any time during the fourth month of August.
  • Even if the court disagrees that I had until 31 August to pay, the fourth month after the contract date included 5 August 2019, and I had until the end of that day to make the payment. This is consistent with the agent's email in July stating that payment was due "by or before 5 August". The vendors were therefore not entitled to terminate the contract during the day of 5 August when they did.
  • If, as the vendor argues, the 4th month after the contract date ended on 4 August, the vendor was still not entitled to terminate the contract during the day of 5 August. The 4th of August was a Sunday, and the contract provided that if the time for something to be done is a day that is not a business day, then the time is extended to the following business day.
  • Since the vendors were not entitled to terminate the contract on 5 August when they purported to do so, the contract is still on foot. The court must order the vendors to complete the sale.
  • Under special condition 38, the purchaser only had until the end of the day on 4 August 2019 to pay the second instalment of the deposit.
  • Our real estate agent denies ever having said that we weren't concerned about the timing of the second instalment of the deposit.
  • In any event, the interpretation of special condition 38 is determined by the definitions of "month" and "calendar month" in the Conveyancing Act and the Interpretation Act. Together, these acts define "month" to mean "calendar month" and "calendar month" to mean a period commencing at the beginning of a day of one of the 12 named months and ending immediately before the beginning of the corresponding day of the next named month. Therefore, the first month after the contract date commenced on 5 April 2019 and concluded on 4 May 2019, the second month after the contract date commenced on 5 May 2019 and concluded on 4 June 2019, the third month after the contract date commenced on 5 June 2019 and concluded on 4 July 2019 and the fourth month after the contract date commenced on 5 July 2019 and concluded on 4 August 2019.
  • These statutory definitions operate unless a contrary intention appears, and there was no contrary intention revealed by the contract.
  • Even though 4 August was a Sunday, the clause allowing for an extension of time when a date falls on a non-business day, was not applicable in these circumstances.
  • Since the purchaser failed to pay the second instalment of the deposit by the end of the day on 4 August as required, we were entitled to terminate the contract when we did and we are entitled to keep the deposit. The court must dismiss the purchaser's claim.

So, which case won?

Cast your judgment below to find out

David Crossan
Disputes and litigation
Stacks Law Firm

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.