Unlocking risk allocation and equitable conversion : reform of the passing of risk in the sale of land

The principles relating to the passing of risk under a contract for the sale of real property would seem to have been long settled. The rule under the general law is that the risk of loss of the subject matter under a contract for the sale of real property passes to the buyer upon the creation of a valid and binding contract. This article considers the origin of that rule, how it developed with the growth of equity, and advances the view that it is anomalous in a modern context of property dealings. In doing so, the article adverts to the variety of statutory mechanisms used to subvert the rule, few of which are of practical value. It concludes that the rule is outmoded in many respects and suggests a number of reforms which might be implemented nationally to bring consistency and simplicity to the issue of damage or destruction of improvements which are the subject of a land contract.

Contracts for the Sale of Land: Understanding the Impecuniosity Defence

Where either the seller or buyer of landed property fails to complete a contract to sell land the non-breaching party has a right to seek specific performance of the contract. This remedy would compel the party in default to perform the contract on pain of being held in contempt of court if the court's order is not obeyed. The defaulting party would not be able to satisfy its obligations under the law by paying a sum of money as damages for breach of contract. This paper considers the impecuniosity defence to specific performance as recognised by courts in Northern Ireland, the Republic of Ireland, Australia and New Zealand. Where the buyer demonstrates that he or she simply cannot raise the funds to buy the property specific performance will not be decreed and the court will make an award of damages for breach of contract measured by the difference between the contract price and the market price of the property at the time of default. The paper considers the nature and parameters of this defence and how it differs (if at all) from the alternative defence of extreme hardship. The paper addresses the question of whether it might be better to move to a position where sellers of land in all cases no longer enjoy a presumption of specific performance but have to demonstrate that the alternative remedy of damages is clearly inadequate. If this should be so the paper goes on to consider whether abolition of the presumption in favour of specific performance for sellers should lead to abolition of the presumption of specific performance for buyers, as is the position in Canada following the Supreme Court's decision in Semelhago v Paramadevan [1996] 2 SCR 415.

Sale of Land for Taxes to W.H. Dickson

Notice of sale of land for taxes to W. H. Dickson. This is a handwritten document. The land consists of 4 acres of Lot no. 12 in the 5th Concession of Wainfleet. This is dated May 23, 1857 [signatures are illegible]. On the back there is a note that Walter Hamilton Dickson has transferred this land to Joseph Augustus Woodruff, Dec. 3, 1861.

Indenture of Agreement for Sale of Land between Samuel Woodruff to Calvin and Ezekiel Cudney

Indenture of Agreement for Sale of Land between Samuel Woodruff of St. Catharines to Calvin and Ezekiel Cudney of the Township of Niagara regarding a footpath and parts of the lots 9 and 10 on the Welland River (78 acres), Oct. 30, 1883.

Indenture of Agreement for Sale of Land between Samuel Woodruff to Calvin and Ezekiel Cudney

Indenture of Agreement for Sale of Land between Samuel Woodruff of St. Catharines to Calvin and Ezekiel Cudney of the Township of Niagara. This is a copy of the previous document but there is an additional note on this document about an “agreement for cutting timber”. This is signed by S.D. Woodruff, Jan. 1885.

Indenture of Agreement for Sale of Land between S.D. Woodruff and Elizabeth Cudney

Indenture of agreement for Sale of Land between S.D. Woodruff of St. Catharines and Elizabeth Cudney of Willoughby regarding a footpath and Lots 9 and 10 in Willoughby, Feb. 6, 1893.

Contracts for the sale of land and personal property:the equitable interests of the purchaser

As property lawyers, we are all familiar with the general principle that a contract for the sale of land, which is capable of specific performance, operates in equity so as to confer a trust on the purchaser pending completion of the sale. Although some controversy exists as to the exact nature of the trust, it is well established that, upon exchange of contracts, equity will ‘‘treat that as done which ought to be done’’1 with the consequence that the purchaser acquires equitable ownership even though full (legal) title to the land will not pass until completion (and registration). As land is unique, specific performance is readily available in the context of sales of land where damages would, clearly, not be an adequate remedy. The same cannot be said for contracts for the purchase of personal property where invariably the subject matter is not unique and where a substitute can easily be acquired in the open market. In circumstances, however, where the property is unique or scarce (for example, a rare painting or vintage car), the maxim that ‘‘equity treats as done that which ought to be done’’ may be invoked so as to confer on the seller an equitable obligation to transfer the property to the purchaser in fulfilment of the contract. Where, therefore, the contract is specifically enforceable in this way, the seller, it is submitted, will again hold the property on trust for the purchaser where, as in a contract for the sale of land, there is an interval between the date of the contract and completion of the sale. The notion that a seller holds personal property upon trust for the purchaser pending completion of the sale is admittedly controversial, but this article seeks to argue that the same principles governing equity’s intervention in sales of land should apply in the context of sales of personalty. It is submitted that equity’s role in imposing a trust on the vendor both in relation to sales of land and personalty may be important in safeguarding the interests of the purchaser prior to, as well as after, completion of the transaction.

New laws for off the plan contracts in Queensland

The Land Sales Act 1984 regulates “off the plan” sales in Queensland in conjunction with several provisions in the Body Corporate and Community Management Act 1997. Together the Acts regulate sales in both unit developments and housing estates. From 2010 to 2013 the Queensland Government undertook a comprehensive review of the Land Sales Act 1984 to identify opportunities to modernise and improve the legislation. Significant changes were recommended by the Review to align the Land Sales Act 1984 (LSA) with current surveying and conveyancing practice and to overcome a number of practical issues faced by developers under the current legislation. A significant outcome of the review is the removal of provisions related to off the plan community title sales from the LSA to the Body Corporate and Community Management Act 1997 (BCCMA) and the Building Units and Group Titles Act 1980 (BUGTA). This article examines the Land Sales and Other Legislation Amendment Act 2014 due to commence in November 2014.

New sale and leasing requirements for owners of swimming pools and their application to strata schemes

This article considers the changes to the Swimming Pools Act 1992 (NSW)(Act) which established a State-wide online register of all private swimming pools in NSW requiring pool owners to register their pools by 19 November 2013. Amendments to the Act introduced changes to the conveyancing and residential tenancy regulations to require vendors and landlords to have a valid Compliance Certificate issued for their swimming pool before offering the property for sale or lease. This article provides a brief overview of the new sale and leasing requirements effective from 29 April 2014, focusing on its application to lot owners within strata and community title schemes and other owners of water front properties with pools on Crown Land Reserves.

Sale of Businesses in Australia (2nd ed.)

The greater volume of businesses sold in Australia each year are small to medium enterprises. The administration of business contracts presents far different challenges than, for example, contracts for the sale of goods alone or contracts for the sale of land. The subject matter comprises both real and personal, and tangible and intangible property. Other considerations that do not affect those other commonplace contracts include dealing with employees who are both remaining and departing, taking account of restraints of trade, and the phenomena of the passing of property being different in respect of different forms of property being transferred in the same contract. In keeping with the format of the previous edition, the book is written with the busy practitioner in mind. It deals with the formation of business contracts, all aspects of disclosure both contractual and statutory, the role of agents, and detailed consideration of the different types of subject matter of small business contracts including, the lease of the premises, intellectual property, goodwill, licences, book debts and plant and equipment. It has up to date treatment of income tax implications of the sale and the impact of the latest Commonwealth legislation on dealing with employees of a business on sale. Consistent with the last edition, the book has chapters on time of the essence and completion, personal securities, restraint of trade clauses, special conditions and remedies for breach by both parties and misleading or deceptive conduct by the seller. In relation to personal securities, whilst the current State and Territory based law on Bills of Sale and other Chattel Securities has been the subject of commentary, the proposed national reform agenda has also been commented upon although that legislation is not due until May 2010 at the earliest

Deed of sale of property, Hingham, Massachusetts, 1686

Deed acknowledging Sprague's sale of land in Hingham to Israel Fering. Signed by Sprague, Nathaniel Beale, Sr., and John Parsens, Jr.

Whose land was it anyway? The Crichel Down Rules and the sale of public land

The guiding principle of compulsory purchase of interests in land in England and Wales is that of fairness, best stated in the words of Lord Justice Scott in Horn v Sunderland Corporation when he said that the owner has “the right to be put, so far as money can do it, in the same position as if his land had not been taken from him”. In many instances, land acquired by compulsion subsequently becomes surplus to the requirements of the acquiring authority. This may be because the intended development scheme was scrapped, or substantially modified, or that after the passage of time the use of the land for which the purchase took place is no longer required. More controversially it may be that for ‘operational reasons’ the acquiring authority knowingly purchased more land than was required for the scheme. Under these circumstances, the Crichel Down Rules (‘the Rules’) require government departments and other statutory bodies to offer back to the former owners or their successors, any land previously so acquired by, or under the threat of, compulsory purchase.