Principal Properties Pty Ltd v Brisbane Broncos Leagues Club Limited

In this matter Jackson J undertook an interesting discussion of whether or not there exists any concept of the suspension contractual obligations in circumstances where one party to a contract has prevented performance by the innocent party. His Honour noted that, despite comments in Grieve v Enge [2006] QCA 213 which might have suggested to the contrary, there is no principle at Common Law to the effect that obligations under contracts might be “suspended”, even in the context of a breach of contract. That said, his Honour noted that non-performance of an obligation by a party to a contract might be excused where that non-performance occurred as a result of the failure of the other party to the agreement to perform their obligations. The matter before Jackson J concerned the operation of a “call option” and his Honour’s reasons for judgment contain some important observations as to the nature and effect of such agreements. It was in this context that his Honour identified that if the failure of the grantee of an option to exercise it in the timeframe stipulated by the contract arose by reason of the grantor’s failure to allow the conditions necessary to permit the grantee to exercise the option to occur, the entitlement to exercise the option might continue for a reasonable period after the performance by the grantor of their obligations. This was identified as being an aspect of the general principle that a person