The ACT Court of Appeal last week dismissed the application to overturn a judgment that forced Dr Andrew Foote to vacate the premises and pay more than $334,000 in overdue rent to a southside medical partnership.

Dr Foote and the Barton Property Partnership No. 2 have been locked in a legal spat for the past two years.

The obstetrician and gynaecologist had been a member of the partnership with several other medical practitioners at the Sydney Avenue medical precinct.

But there was conflict and he quit in September 2013, with the final date to be in April last year.

Dr Foote attempted to negotiate the purchase of part of the property from the partnership, before he issued a notice of dispute alleging the partnership had agreed to sell him the unit.

He then had a legal expert appointed to adjudicate on the disagreement.

The partnership did not agree to the appointment and later disputed the determination, which had been in favour of Dr Foote.

In May last year, the partnership terminated Dr Foote's lease at the property for non-payment of rent.

Dr Foote contested the termination and sought court orders to enforce the sale for more than $2.44 million.

But, in a decision in December, Associate Justice David Mossop found the legal expert had not been appointed properly and that the lease could be terminated.

Master Mossop ordered Dr Foote to vacate the premises by January 9, pay $334,388.57 in outstanding rent, and cover the legal costs of the property partnership.

Dr Foote appealed against that decision, arguing that the partnership should be bound by the expert determination – meaning he could buy the property – as it had participated in the decision process.

Lawyers for Dr Foote also argued that the failure of the partnership to sell him the units constituted a repudiation of the agreement of sale and he should be paid damages as a result.

But appeal judges – Chief Justice Helen Murrell, Acting Justice Stephen Walmsley, and Justice Melissa Perry – threw out the appeal.

The judges found the partnership did not unequivocally elect to treat the legal expert's determination as final and binding as it had disputed the appointment.

A judgment, published last week, said the partnership had participated in the determination process in order to protect itself from the possibility that the legal expert had been properly authorised and any possible adverse outcome.

"From the outset, BPP2 made its position clear, both to the legal expert and to Dr Foote," the decision said.

"In those circumstances, BPP2's decision to engage in the determination process under protest was reasonable.

"BPP2's reasonable decision that it would participate in the dispute resolution process under protest, did not evidence a waiver of any right to later challenge the process."

The partnership's lawyer, David Robens, from Kamy Saeedi Law, said his clients had been glad the litigation had come to an end.

"Dr Andrew Foote has tried to attack his former partners through every conceivable legal channel, refusing to pay more than $334,000 in rent, then commencing a number of proceedings in the Supreme Court, the ACT Court of Appeal and the Magistrates Court," Mr Robens said.

"It is disappointing to see these resources being wasted, but at the same time, it is satisfying to see the court processes working efficiently to assist with the resolution of these disputes, with the partners being able to recover the payments."

Dr Foote's lawyers were contacted for comment.