Weeding v Salters: Tasmanian party hire rivals in pitched legal battle over stalled $5.5M buyout

Two of Tasmania’s biggest party hire companies are headed for a marquee legal showdown, after one operator’s eleventh-hour retreat from a $5.5 million sale agreement with its long-term rival.

Wedding table decoration from above

Two of Tasmania’s biggest party hire companies are heading for a marquee showdown in the Supreme Court, after one operator’s eleventh-hour retreat from a $5.5 million sale agreement with its long-term rival.

In documents lodged with the Supreme Court and seen by the Mercury, Weeding Party Hire is seeking to hold Salters (Tas) Pty Ltd to the terms of a 2023 contract, in which Salters agreed to sell its business and assets to the plaintiff.

Salters Tasmania, also known as Salters Hire, have been used for event and equipment hire at events like Tasmania's Taste of Summer. Picture: Facebook

According to the terms of the alleged business sale agreement, $500,000 was payable by Weeding to Salters by 19 July 2023, another $2,250,000 was to be paid on the agreed contract completion date of 1 September 2023, while the remaining $2,750,000 was to become a debt established by a loan arrangement between the parties.

In its amended statement of claim lodged two months ago, Weeding stated it made the $500,000 down payment on the scheduled date, but had on 1 September 2023 informed Salters it was not in a position to settle that day, and would continue to take steps to settle as soon as it could.

The plaintiff claimed that despite the parties mutually agreeing on 4 September 2023 to push the completion date back until 8 September, Salters then purported to terminate the business sale agreement.

Weeding claimed that between 5 September and 8 September 2023, it completed all the remaining steps required to proceed to settlement, and was “ready, willing and able” to complete the business sale agreement by 8 September, at the latest.

Weeding Hire. Picture: Facebook

The plaintiff – which claimed Salters has refused to proceed to completion on the basis of the purported termination – has sought orders for the defendant to specifically perform the business sale agreement.

Weeding’s legal action also includes a claim for interest and costs.

In its defence to Weeding’s amended statement of claim, Salters has relied on a business sale agreement clause which states “if any condition precedent is not satisfied by the date set for satisfaction of that particular condition precedent … then either party may terminate this agreement at any time thereafter and before completion by noticed in writing to the other party.”

Salters has denied Weeding is entitled to orders that the defendant specifically perform the business sale agreement.

The case is expected to be heard by the Supreme Court in the new year.