Howard -Jones v Tate

Where a post-completion condition in a contract for the sale of land is breached, the innocent party is entitled to damages for losses suffered, not rescission ab initio. The contract is not unwound; damages are to reflect the cost of remedying the breach and consequential losses, not to restore the parties to their pre-contractual positions.

Parties: Claimant/respondent: Paul Martin Foster Howard-Jones; Defendant/appellant: Dennis Eaton Tate
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Judgment Date: 24 November 2011
Procedural Posture: Civil Appeal / Appeal From Trial Judgment
Outcome: Appeal allowed; cross-appeal dismissed
Legal Topics: Breach of Contract, Remedies for Breach, Rescission, Damages, Sale of Land

Contract Law Property Law Breach of Contract Remedies for Breach Rescission Damages Sale of Land

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4

Parties

Paul Martin Foster Howard-Jones

Claimant/respondent

Dennis Eaton Tate

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Trial Judgment

Legal Issues

1 Whether the purchaser was entitled to rescind the contract for breach of a post-completion condition in a sale of land
2 Whether damages should restore the purchaser to his pre-contractual position if rescission is not available

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; cross-appeal dismissed

Orders

Matter remitted to Lincoln County Court for reassessment of damages before a different judge
Respondent not entitled to rescission ab initio; damages to be assessed for actual loss