A court has ruled three purchasers of luxury apartments at Mirvac's Beachside Leighton development who tried to back out of their contracts must uphold the terms of sale.
A court has ruled three purchasers of luxury apartments at Mirvac's Beachside Leighton development who tried to back out of their contracts must uphold the terms of sale.
The court was determining whether Mirvac and the purchasers had agreed to a period after the date of the contract within which a strata plan for the Beachside development would be registered.
The purchasers had argued that there was no period greater than six months agreed upon to pay the contracts, and under the Strata Titles Act 1985, since the strata plan was not registered, the purchasers were entitled to void the sale.
But Justice Kenneth Martin of the Western Australian Supreme Court said in each contract of sale, there was a defined registration date, found in the special conditions, which nominated a date for registration of the strata plan - 48 months after the contract was agreed to.
"Nomination of '48 months' in part of the (Special Conditions) definition for registration date is clear to a reader, even to someone glancing only quickly at the provisions," Justice Martin said in his judgement.
"Four years is a longish time after the contract of sale before a strata plan emerges. It stands out.
"It is unlikely to be overlooked by a purchaser interested about the point."
Justice Martin ruled formal cost orders would be awarded in Mirvac's favour against the three purchasers.
Mirvac's Western Australian chief executive Evan Campbell said the court's decision in all three cases vindicated Mirvac's position ion pursuing the purchasers' contractual agreements.
"We are confident we have delivered a high quality development in Beachside Leighton and having met all our commitments to purchasers we expect them to do the same thing and fulfil their contractual agreements with us," Mr Campbell said.
"We have always adopted the stance that we would be seeking performance of all agreements, in line with our legal rights under the contract of sale, and we will vigorously defend our position."
Friday's judgement is separate to a Supreme Court writ filed in March by Carmelo and Anne Bontempo, which alleged the developer did not achieve the luxury standards required under the contract.
That court action is ongoing.
