McGahon v Crest Nicholson Regeneration Ltd [2010] EWCA Civ 842 (21 July 2010)
The right to rescind under clause 4 could only be exercised while the condition (grant of the headlease) remained unperformed; once the headlease was granted, the right to rescind ceased to exist. The contract did not expressly provide for rescission after performance of the condition, and such a construction would be uncommercial.
- Citation
- [2010] EWCA Civ 842
- Parties
- Appellant: McGahon; Respondent: Crest Nicholson Regeneration Ltd
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 21 July 2010
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Appeal From County Court Judgment
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Conditional Contracts, Right of Rescission, Off Plan Property Purchase, Interpretation of Contract Clauses
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
McGahon
Appellant
Crest Nicholson Regeneration Ltd
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From County Court Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the right to rescind under clause 4 of the contract could be exercised after the headlease had been granted but after the specified date
- 2 Proper construction of a conditional contract for the purchase of property
Ratio Decidendi
The right to rescind under clause 4 could only be exercised while the condition (grant of the headlease) remained unperformed; once the headlease was granted, the right to rescind ceased to exist. The contract did not expressly provide for rescission after performance of the condition, and such a construction would be uncommercial.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment