Meridien AB Pty Ltd & Anor v Jackson & Ors

This decision of the Court of Appeal concerns an unusual aspect of statutory interpretation where the Court is permitted to depart from the “clear and unambiguous” meaning of the words of the statute.  The case concerned a contract to purchase an apartment in a proposed development at Airlie Beach.  The purchasers did not complete the contract on the day agreed upon for settlement.  The vendors, the appellants before the Court of Appeal, commenced proceedings for specific performance on 30 June 2011.  However, under s 27 of the Land Sales Act a contract for the purchase of a proposed allotment must have been completed within three and a half years from the date that the contract was entered into.  The time allowed under s 27 expired on 2 July 2011.  Thereafter, the purchasers purported to elect to terminate the contract under s 27 and claimed that relief for specific performance was no longer available.  Muir JA’s reasons for judgment considers a wide range of authorities concerning the modern approach to statutory interpretation as well as the ancient maxim nullus commodum capere potest de injuria sua propria: no man can take advantage of his own wrong.  His Honour concluded that it was unlikely that s 27 was intended to operate so as to permit a purchaser to escape from their contractual obligations by frustrating various attempts to settle until after the date imposed by s 27.  The case contains a very helpful and compendious collection of authorities concerning the occasions on which a Court might depart from the prima facie meaning of the words of a statute.