Yolk Property Group has been caught up in a legal dispute with a disgruntled purchaser who bought a $1.5 million lot on its North Fremantle project.
Yolk Property Group has been caught up in a legal dispute with a disgruntled purchaser who bought a $1.5 million lot on its North Fremantle project.
The WA Court of Appeal bench today overturned the previous decision to dismiss a lawsuit over Yolk’s alleged breach of contract with a buyer, Paul Scanlan.
Supreme Court of Western Australia Master Craig Sanderson dismissed Mr Scanlan’s application last year after being unsatisfied that there was a cause of action against Yolk.
In the judgment delivered by WA Supreme Court justices Andrew Beech, Stephen Hall, and Michael Lundberg, the Court of Appeal ruled that Master Sanderson made an error.
Mr Scanlan bought a lot in Yolk’s Cornerstone project in North Fremantle for $1.47 million in March 2021, according to the judgment.
The project on 2-4 McCabe Place comprises 10 two-storey group dwellings and one three-storey home.
The judgment said Yolk terminated the contract of sale in mid-2022 after a lack of pre-sales interest and rising construction costs.
Yolk allegedly told Mr Scanlan that his proposed townhouse would need to be sold for $1.8 million to break even.
The judgment said Mr Scanlan did not accept Yolk’s notice of termination or its claim that the contract was void after the development plan was changed to cater for the escalated construction costs.
Mr Scanlan, according to the judgment, asked Yolk to produce documents needed for a pre-trial process but was allegedly ignored or declined by the developer.
The WA Court of Appeal ordered Yolk to provide a list of documents on all executed sales contracts for the development, marketing material, and data used for sale projections.
The bench also ordered Yolk to pay Mr Scanlan’s costs of the appeal.
“Given the master's conclusion, he did not undertake an analysis as to whether the available factual material provided the necessary support for the appellant's claim that the termination powers were exercised in an ineffective manner,” their judgment said.
