Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 26 SEPTEMBER 2023

Xue v Karimbla Properties (No.45) Pty Ltd (No 2) [2023] NSWSC 795

2 lessons - Court holds a broad discretion as to costs & Walk Away offers are capable of engaging the Calderbank principles.

AustraliaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration

Background

Xue (the plaintiffs) were the purchasers of an off-the-plan apartment from members of the Meriton Group of companies (the defendants) who alleged they were misled by the defendants, prior to settlement, regarding the availability of vendor finance at the market interest rate, resulting in non-completion of the contract for sale.

The plaintiffs subsequently commenced proceedings in the Supreme Court of New South Wales seeking the return of a $87,300 deposit and unspecified damages (the latter of which were not sought at the Hearing) occasioned by alleged misleading or deceptive conduct on the part of the defendants in contravention of section 18 of the Australian Consumer Law or section 12DA of the Australian Securities and Investments Commission Act 2001 (Cth).

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

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.

See more popular content from