High Court says hotel sale not frustrated by pandemic

In mid-March this year, the High Court unanimously overturned a decision of the New South Wales (NSW) Court of Appeal about the sale of Quarryman’s Hotel in Sydney and the issue of frustration in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. The High Court found the hotel’s compliance with public gathering restrictions did not give the buyer a right to repudiate the purchase agreement.


The contract required the seller to carry on the business in the ‘usual and ordinary course’ until the date of settlement. However, shortly after entering the contract, the Australian Government issued public health orders restricting the hotel to takeaway sales and delivery due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The business experienced a decline in value of $1 million, and the buyer sought to be released from the contract on the basis it had been frustrated.

The NSW Supreme Court initially said the contract had not been frustrated because the seller had not warranted the future income of the business. However, the NSW Court of Appeal went on to find the public health orders meant the seller was incapable of complying with its obligation to carry on the business to the standard required so the buyer was justified in refusing to settle and demand recovery of its deposit.

High Court appeal

The High Court found unanimously in the seller’s favour and said the seller was ‘ready, willing and able to complete’ the sale and had kept trading despite the pandemic restrictions.

The Court found the seller’s obligation was to ‘carry on the business in the usual and ordinary course as regards its nature, scope and manner’ incorporated an inherent requirement to do so in accordance with law. This included not only the hotel’s liquor and gaming licences but also compliance with public health orders.

The Court also said the seller had not guaranteed the hotel’s future value, nor had it accepted the risk the buyer could withdraw from the purchase if the value was reduced.


The decision provides important clarity on the effectiveness of the ‘business as usual’ type clause in allocating the risk of legislative change, not only in relation to COVID-19 pandemic issues but generally.


Emma Woolley

Partner & Head of Family Office Advisory

Karl Rozenbergs

Partner and Co-Lead Health & Care

Ben Hamilton

Partner & Technology and Digital Economy Co-Lead

James Deady

Partner & Technology and Digital Economy Co-Lead

Eugene Chen

Partner & Head of China Practice

Oliver Jankowsky

Partner & Head of International Practice

John Bassilios

Partner & Fintech and Blockchain Lead

Matthew Curll

Partner & Insurance National Practice Leader

Melanie Smith

Director – Business Development, Marketing and Communications

Natalie Bannister

Partner & Commercial National Practice Leader

Nathan Kennedy

Partner, Head of Pro Bono & Community and ESG Co-Lead

William Moore

Partner & Head of Private Clients Advisory

Mark Dessi

Partner & Energy Leader

James Bull

Special Counsel & Frank Lab Co-Lead

Melanie James

People & Culture Manager

Jacqui Barrett

Partner & Head of US Desk

Lauren Parrant

Senior People & Culture Advisor

Melinda Woledge

Marketing & Communications Manager

Jasmine Koh

Senior Associate & Frank Lab Co-Lead

Alison Choy Flannigan

Partner and Co-Lead Health & Care

Jordon Lee


Geoff Benson


Meg Lee

Partner & ESG Co-Lead

John Gray

Partner, Technology & Digital Economy Co-Lead and NSW Government Co-Lead

Harvey Duckett


Luke Denham


Billie Kerkez

Manager – Smarter Recovery Solutions

Jemima Whiteman


Bradley White


Sarah Khan


Audrey Leahy

Special Counsel & Head of Irish Desk

Nicole Tumiati

Partner & Retail & Consumer Goods Leader

Marie Mitilineos


Gloria Tam


Peter Jones

Senior Commercial Counsel

Eden Winokur

Partner & Head of Cyber

Jennifer Degotardi

Partner & NSW Government Co-Lead

Sheldon Fu


Claire Bourke


Silvana Brcina


Daphne Schilizzi


Andrew Banks


Isabella Urso


Jessica Liu


Amelia Spratt


Lisa Ziegert

Director – Client Solutions

Luke Raams


Emma McDonald


Carl Ayers


Maddison Reznik

Senior Associate & Trade Marks Attorney

Rebecca Dodd


Ruby Hunt

Pro Bono & Community Co-ordinator

Rachel Bonic


Samantha Frost


Emma Bechaz


Matt Dolan


Luke Hefferan


Michelle Harradine


Related industries

You might be also interested in...

Insurance | 17 Mar 2023

Subpar result for sub-subcontractor

The New South Wales Supreme Court has recently considered the construction of a general liability policy of insurance, as to whether a sub-subcontractor was an ‘insured’ or ‘agent’ as defined in the policy to enliven coverage. We examine.

Uncategorised | 17 Mar 2023

Systems and processes – adequate not perfect

ASIC brought a proceeding against the Commonwealth Bank of Australia (CBA), alleging CBA violated the ASIC Act and Corporations Act by erroneously charging monthly account fees to customers in circumstances where the fee should have been waived. ASIC asserted CBA did not have adequate systems and processes. The court dismissed the proceeding and rejected ASIC’s argument that systems and processes need to have a zero percent mistake or failure rate to be adequate.  Partner Selina Nutley explains the key points and what you need to know now.