The parties entered into two linked contracts providing for a property and a business to be transferred, a lease granted and otherwise. The transfer of the property was in the sum expressed in the sum and at the time the other agreement provided for the deposit. After that transfer the claimant issued a notice to … Continue reading Omar v El-Wakil: CA 11 Jul 2001
The vendor had purported to rescind the contract and retain the deposit, while selling to another purchaser at a higher price. Held: The purchaser was entitled to return of the deposit, because the notice to complete had been ineffective. After referring to Schindler, Mervin Davies J said: ‘With those observations in mind, it seems that … Continue reading Cole v Rose: 1978
The purchaser of land had not completed and sought return of the deposit paid claiming default by the vendor, or alternatively under section 49(2). Held: He was entitled to the repayment of the deposit on the first ground. The court went further to hold that, even if the purchaser had been at fault, section 49(2) … Continue reading Schindler v Pigault: 1975
The parties entered into three related contracts to grant long leases of three flats in the same block (Nos 37, 32 and 31), and deposits paid. The vendor served notices to complete and when the purchaser did not comply, he rescinded each agreement and forfeited the deposits. The purchaser sought repayment of the deposits under … Continue reading Tennaro Ltd v Majorarch: 2003
The court considered the interpretation of clauses allowing a notice to complete a contract for the sale of land. Godfrey QC said: ‘In my judgment this notice, served as it was under cover of the letter of November 10, 1981, referring to the National Conditions of Sale, and referring as it did to the contract … Continue reading Dimsdale Developments (South East) Ltd v De Haan: 1983
The issue was the proper construction and effect of condition 6.8 of the Standard Conditions of Sale, 2nd edition, in relation to the giving of a notice to complete a contract for the sale of land. Held: The condition provided exclusively for the circumstances in which a notice to complete could be given in respect … Continue reading Country and Metropolitan Homes Surrey Ltd v Topclaim Ltd: 1996
Refusal to return Land Contract Deposit The court was asked as to whether a seller could retain a deposit paid by the claimant on a sale where contracts had been exchanged but the buyer had proved unable to go ahead. Held: The appeal against refusal of return of the deposit failed. The court looked at … Continue reading MIDILL (97Pl) Ltd v Park Lane Estates Ltd and Another: CA 11 Nov 2008
Purchasers of a property intended to finance the purchase from monies deposited in a bank in Nigeria. Due to a change in exchange control regulations, the money was received some six weeks late, and after a notice to complete had expired and the . .
The purchaser had failed to complete, notwithstanding the service of a notice to complete. The purchaser a Nigerian company suffered a delay in obtaining funds due to a change in the exchange control regulations. There was no attempt to exclude . .
Property was offered for sale by tender. The tender documents contained all the detailed terms upon which the contract was to be based. The successful tender was accepted by letter, but by mistake the secretary who typed it typed in the words . .
The appellant had agreed to take leases on a development of the defendant, hoping to sell the apartments on at a profit. After difficulties, the appellant refused to complete, and the defendant forfeited the deposits.
Held: Eyestorm’s appeal . .
The claimant sought a declaration that a contract for the sale of property in London to the First Defendant has terminated, leaving the Claimant free to deal with the property as he chose. Teseo counterclaimed for specific performance of the . .
Was the vendor of shares in a company owning a single property, who had served notice to complete on the purchaser, itself ready, able and willing to complete? . .
The claimant contracted to buy two apartments from the defendant. The contract purported to exclude section 49. . .
The parties had agreed in a contract for the sale and purchase of land to exclude the application of section 49(2). The buyer had failed to comply with a notice to complete.
Held: The parties cannot contract out of section 49(2). The . .
The court declined to express a view on the use of section 49(2) to order the return of a deposit. Citations:  2 All ER 31 Statutes: Law of Property Act 1925 49(1) Cited by: Cited – MIDILL (97Pl) Ltd v Park Lane Estates Ltd and Another CA 11-Nov-2008 Refusal to return Land Contract Deposit … Continue reading James Macara v Barclay: CA 1944