Shill Properties Limited v Anne Bunch

Shill Properties Limited v Anne Bunch

There was no valid exchange of contracts as the claimant's solicitor did not hold a signed contract at the time of purported exchange, failing section 2 of the Law of Property (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1989. Alternatively, the contract was procured by fraudulent misrepresentation as to the claimant being a cash buyer, entitling the defendant to set aside the contract.

Parties
Claimant: Shill Properties Limited; Defendant: Anne Bunch
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 September 2024
Procedural Posture
Civil Property/contract / Trial Judgment
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Specific Performance, Sale of Land, Fraudulent Misrepresentation, Undue Influence, Compliance With Statutory Formalities
Contract Law Property Law Misrepresentation Specific Performance Sale of Land Fraudulent Misrepresentation Undue Influence Compliance With Statutory Formalities

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 4 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Shill Properties Limited

Claimant

Anne Bunch

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Property/contract / Trial Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a valid exchange of contracts occurred under section 2 of the Law of Property (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1989
  2. 2 Whether the contract was void for non-compliance with statutory requirements
  3. 3 Whether there was fraudulent misrepresentation by the claimant as a 'cash buyer'

Ratio Decidendi

There was no valid exchange of contracts as the claimant's solicitor did not hold a signed contract at the time of purported exchange, failing section 2 of the Law of Property (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1989. Alternatively, the contract was procured by fraudulent misrepresentation as to the claimant being a cash buyer, entitling the defendant to set aside the contract.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed

Orders

  • Claim for specific performance dismissed
  • No valid contract for sale was exchanged