Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 05 AUGUST 2015

Email correspondence leads to binding contract despite negotiations being subject to contract

The Court found that a chain of emails in the context at hand formed a binding contract for the sale of the roadhouse.

AustraliaReal Estate and Construction

HopgoodGanim Lawyers recently published an alert in relation to a decision of the Court of Appeal of Western Australia, which held that an email exchange between a tenant and a landlord's agent amounted to an immediately binding agreement to lease and a licence. The Supreme Court of Queensland also has recently considered an agreement arising in similar circumstances.

In the recent case of Stellard Pty Ltd & Anor v North Queensland Fuel Pty Ltd [2015] QSC 119, the Supreme Court of Queensland found that a chain of emails in the context at hand formed a binding contract for the sale of a roadhouse. It is a decision which has important commercial ramifications, particularly in the negotiation of a term sheet or heads of agreement, as the Court made this finding even though:

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.

See more popular content from