header-logo header-logo

17 April 2008
Issue: 7317 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-detail

Conveyancing

Aribisala v St James’ Homes (Grosvenor Dock) Ltd [2008] EWHC 456 (Ch), [2008] All ER (D) 201 (Mar)

The only real scope for the operation of s 49(2) of the Law of Property Act 1925 (ordering the return of a deposit) is when the purchaser is the party unable to perform the contract: where it is the vendor who is unable to perform the contract, the purchaser will have a legal right to the return of the deposit.

What needs to be looked at is how close the purchaser came to performing the  contract, what alternatives he was able to  propose to the vendor and how advantageous they would be compared with actual performance of the contractual terms. Where the purchaser simply could not perform the contract or offer any such alternative, then it would be exceptional for the deposit to be returned.

Issue: 7317 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Harneys—Maggie Kwok & George Weston

Harneys—Maggie Kwok & George Weston

Harneys senior leadership appointments

Freeths—Keith Browne & Jim Jordan

Freeths—Keith Browne & Jim Jordan

Freeths strengthens London Construction and Engineering practice with two strategic senior hires

Anthony Collins—Laura Moss

Anthony Collins—Laura Moss

Anthony Collins announces strategic hire to deepen skills base in the social business sector

NEWS
Existing defamation law can respond to AI ‘hallucinations’, but allocating responsibility will prove harder where outputs reach users without human intervention
The High Court has upheld a rare successful serious-irregularity challenge after an arbitrator relied on an implied term neither party had advanced
Thirty years after The Future of Law shook a profession still using fax machines, its central forecast looks increasingly less like prophecy and more like description
More than 100 teams from the legal and financial services sectors competed in five sports at the 51st Law Society RFC Festival of Sport earlier this month
Part-time status need only be an effective cause of less favourable treatment, rather than the sole cause, the Supreme Court has held in Augustine v Data Cars
back-to-top-scroll