The parties exchanged contracts for the sale and purchase of land, but the contract had attached an incorrect plan, including a strip of land now disputed. Neither party had properly attended to what they were signing. The plaintiff buyer maintained her desire to acquire some part of the disputed land. The vendor defendant refused to complete seeking by counterclaim rectification. The wording of the conveyance to the vendor which fell to be construed contained this formula, ‘as the same is more particularly delineated on the plan annexed hereto and thereon coloured pink’.
Held: Rectification was refused, and the deposit was to be returned with some damages.
Morton J stated that the view which he felt compelled to adopt was one which he would not adopt unless the words were so strong that he felt himself judicially incapable of resisting their proper inference, and he thought that those words were too strong: ‘I find myself unable to come to any conclusion other than that, on the true construction of the contract, the disputed strip is included in the land which is sold’.
Where a vendor of land failed to complete for reasons other than a defect in title and the purchaser was unable to prove a loss of profits he was entitled by way of damages, in addition to the return of the deposit, to interest in respect of the loss of use of the deposit and to the costs of approving and executing the contract, investigating title, preparing the conveyance and of searches.
Morton J said: ‘The case is a good illustration of the fact that actions in which the subject-matter is comparatively trifling often give rise to the most difficult questions of fact and of law’.
Morton J
[1939] Ch 588, [1939] 2 All ER 255, (1939) 108 LJ Ch 305, (1939) 160 LT 537, (1939) 55 TLR 531, (1939) 83 Sol Jo 297
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Omak Maritime Ltd v Mamola Challenger Shipping Co Ltd ComC 4-Aug-2010
Lost Expenses as Damages for Contract Breach
The court was asked as to the basis in law of the principle allowing a contracting party to claim, as damages for breach, expenditure which has been wasted as a result of a breach. The charterer had been in breach of the contract but the owner had . .
Cited – Hopgood v Brown CA 3-Feb-1955
Two adjoining plots were conveyed to the same purchaser. Buildings were constructed, and the adjusted boundary required an obtuse angle. The plots were sold on separately but with the original straight boundaries. The plans on the conveyances had no . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 07 September 2021; Ref: scu.421539
