Hardy & Anor v Griffiths & Anor

Hardy & Anor v Griffiths & Anor

The defendants were not entitled to rescind the contract as no actionable misrepresentation or fraud was established; the claimants' exclusion clause was fair and reasonable, limiting actionable representations to those made in writing by solicitors. The claimants were entitled to forfeit the deposit and claim the further deposit as damages for breach, as accrued rights survived contractual rescission. Damages under the collateral agreement were also awarded.

Parties
Claimant: Alan Ronald Geoffrey Hardy; Claimant: Juliet Caroline Hardy; Defendant: William Robert Griffiths; Defendant: Angela May Griffiths
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
02 December 2014
Procedural Posture
Civil / Final Judgment
Outcome
Claim for rescission, forfeiture of deposit, further deposit, and damages under collateral agreement allowed; counterclaim dismissed.
Legal Topics
Rescission, Deposit Forfeiture, Misrepresentation, Damages, Exclusion Clauses, Sale of Land
Contract Law Property Law Rescission Deposit Forfeiture Misrepresentation Damages Exclusion Clauses 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 5 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Alan Ronald Geoffrey Hardy

Claimant

Juliet Caroline Hardy

Claimant

William Robert Griffiths

Defendant

Angela May Griffiths

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendants were entitled to rescind the contract for sale of land
  2. 2 Whether the claimants were entitled to forfeit the deposit and claim further deposit as damages
  3. 3 Whether actionable misrepresentation occurred

Ratio Decidendi

The defendants were not entitled to rescind the contract as no actionable misrepresentation or fraud was established; the claimants' exclusion clause was fair and reasonable, limiting actionable representations to those made in writing by solicitors. The claimants were entitled to forfeit the deposit and claim the further deposit as damages for breach, as accrued rights survived contractual rescission. Damages under the collateral agreement were also awarded.

Court Disposition

Claim for rescission, forfeiture of deposit, further deposit, and damages under collateral agreement allowed; counterclaim dismissed.

Orders

  • Declaration that contract rescinded and no longer remains on foot
  • Declaration that deposit of £150,000 and accrued interest forfeited to claimants