header-logo header-logo

Time to sit up & take notice

20 September 2013 / Daniel Gatty
Issue: 7576 / Categories: Features , Property
printer mail-detail
istock_000016582578medium

If someone fails to buy land by the agreed date, when can the other party terminate the contract? Daniel Gatty reports

Failure to complete a contract to purchase land by the agreed date does not usually entitle the innocent party to terminate the contract immediately. Generally, there will be an express requirement to serve a notice to complete first. Will the innocent party always be able to terminate after serving a notice to complete? And when can the innocent party terminate without serving a notice to complete? These were the issues considered in Urban I (Blonk Street) Ltd v Ayres [2013] EWCA Civ 816.

Mr and Mrs Ayres agreed to buy an apartment in the claimant’s development off-plan. The contract did not fix a completion date for the development. It provided that when the building of the apartment was finished the developer would give notice; completion of the purchase was to take place within 10 days of service of that notice. There was no long-stop date for completion, but

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

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll