Midill (97pl) Ltd v Park Lane Estates Ltd & Anor [2008] EWHC 18 (Ch) (16 January 2008)

Midill (97pl) Ltd v Park Lane Estates Ltd & Anor [2008] EWHC 18 (Ch) (16 January 2008)

Midill failed to prove that Gomba was not ready, able and willing to complete at the relevant dates. The right to forfeit the deposit stands, and there are no special circumstances justifying its return under section 49(2) of the Law of Property Act 1925.

Citation
[2008] EWHC 18 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: MIDILL (97PL) LIMITED; First Defendant: PARK LANE ESTATES LIMITED; Second Defendant: GOMBA INTERNATIONAL INVESTMENTS LIMITED
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 January 2008
Procedural Posture
Chancery Division Contract Dispute / Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Readiness to Complete, Forfeiture of Deposit, Sale of Shares in Property Company, Section 49(2) Law of Property Act 1925, Standard Conditions of Sale
Contract Law Property Law Readiness to Complete Forfeiture of Deposit Sale of Shares in Property Company Section 49(2) Law of Property Act 1925 Standard Conditions of Sale

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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

MIDILL (97PL) LIMITED

Claimant

PARK LANE ESTATES LIMITED

First Defendant

GOMBA INTERNATIONAL INVESTMENTS LIMITED

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Chancery Division Contract Dispute / Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the vendor was ready, able and willing to complete at the relevant dates for service and expiry of notice to complete
  2. 2 Whether the purchaser is entitled to repayment of the deposit under section 49(2) of the Law of Property Act 1925

Ratio Decidendi

Midill failed to prove that Gomba was not ready, able and willing to complete at the relevant dates. The right to forfeit the deposit stands, and there are no special circumstances justifying its return under section 49(2) of the Law of Property Act 1925.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed

Orders

  • Claim for damages and return of deposit dismissed
  • Gomba not obliged to repay the deposit