JOSEPH KLEIN Vs. ELIAHU (LEO) HEIMAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal, which is brought from the judgment of the Supreme Court of Palestine reversing the judgment of the District Court of Tel Aviv, raises a number of questions, upon only one of which their Lordships think it necessary to express an opinion. They desire at the outset to emphasise this point in order to preclude the possibility of a plea of res judicata being raised by reason of their decision in respect of any other matter which may be in dispute between the parties.

(2.) The single question upon which their Lordships propose to express their views is whether the learned Judges of the Supreme Court were right in deciding that the case was not one in which a declaratory order should have been made by the District Court.

(3.) For the purpose of determining this question, they can state the relevant facts very shortly. The appellants as vendors and the respondents as purchasers on 3 October 1937, entered into one or more contracts for the sale and purchase of certain land at Tel Aviv, upon which shops were to be erected by the appellants. Each contract contained a number of elaborate provisions which it is unnecessary to state and in particular by cl. 22 provided that in a certain event the appellants (the vendors) should be entitled to cancel the contracts by a preliminary notice of seven days and that the purchasers should pay the damages stipulated and that they should likewise immediately vacate the shop and deliver it back to the vendors in the same good condition as they received it.