header-logo header-logo

12 June 2008 / Kate Chambers
Issue: 7325 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Profession , Commercial
printer mail-detail

Getting it back!

What do courts have to consider when deciding whether or not to return a buyer's deposit? asks Kate Chambers

The recent case of Aribisala v St James' Homes (Grosvenor Dock) Ltd [2008] EWHC 456 (Ch), [2008] All ER (D) 201 (Mar) considers the importance of deposits in conveyancing transactions and highlights the significance of the Law of Property Act 1925 (LPA 1925) in relation to the terms upon which a deposit is given.

Significance of a Deposit

The buyer's payment of a deposit as part payment of the total purchase price, is taken as a reliable indicator of a willingness to proceed. It is commonly accepted that the buyer is likely to forfeit the deposit if there is a failure to fulfil the contract. The Standard Conditions of Sale (4th Ed) provide that should the buyer fail to complete the seller is entitled to retain the deposit. Additionally, the case of Hall v Burnell [1911] 2 Ch 551, [1911-13] All ER Rep 631 clarified

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Arc Pensions Law—Matthew Swynnerton

Arc Pensions Law—Matthew Swynnerton

Chair of the Association of Pension Lawyers joins as partner

Ampa Group—Kamal Chauhan

Ampa Group—Kamal Chauhan

Group names Shakespeare Martineau partner head of Sheffield office

Blake Morgan—four promotions

Blake Morgan—four promotions

Four legal directors promoted to partner across UK offices

NEWS

The abolition of assured shorthold tenancies and section 21 evictions marks the beginning of a ‘brave new world’ for England’s rental sector, writes Daniel Bacon of Seddons GSC

Stephen Gold’s latest Civil Way column rounds up a flurry of procedural and regulatory changes reshaping housing, alternative dispute resolution (ADR) and personal injury litigation
Patients are being systematically failed by an NHS complaints regime that is opaque, poorly enforced and often stacked against them, argues Charles Davey of The Barrister Group
A wealthy Russian divorce battle has produced a sharp warning about trying to challenge foreign nuptial agreements in the wrong English court. Writing in NLJ this week, Vanessa Friend and Robert Jackson of Hodge Jones & Allen examine Timokhin v Timokhina, where the High Court enforced Russian judgments arising from a prenuptial agreement despite arguments based on the landmark Radmacher decision
An obscure Victorian tort may be heading for an unexpected revival after a significant Privy Council ruling that could reshape liability for dangerous escapes, according to Richard Buckley, barrister and emeritus professor of law at the University of Reading
back-to-top-scroll