© Getty images
Harry Hatwell pitches in on unstable wedding venues & the right to a price reduction
- The statutory right to a price reduction is not to be confused with a common law claim for consequential loss.
- Loss of contracted-for amenity can be considered for price reduction.
- The contract price is the ceiling for any price reduction.
In what was described by the trial judge, District Judge MacCuish, as ‘drama’, Yorkshire Yurts v Crane ([2025] EWCC 63 and, on appeal, [2026] EWCC 41) concerned chaos preceding a wedding. Miss Charlotte Crane (now Mrs Easterby) and Mr William Easterby were married on 8 June 2024 in what was a ‘high-end’ wedding. For three days, the married couple-to-be (the claimants) and workers from Miss Crane’s family farm assisted workers from Yorkshire Yurts (the defendant) in erecting marquees and a central yurt to be used for the dinner and dancing following the wedding (the yurt). Under their contract with the defendant, the claimants had paid £16,504 (the contract price), including a 25% refundable damage deposit and
