BFMG LTD v SPEIRS [2014] NZHC 2503

BFMG LTD v SPEIRS [2014] NZHC 2503

Court found the purchaser's evidence that an engineer/EQC inspection representation was made was implausible and rejected it; alternatively any information conveyed was substantially true; therefore no actionable misrepresentation or right to cancel arose and plaintiff entitled to specific performance and...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
(2014) 15 NZCPR 518
Parties
Plaintiff: BFMG Limited; First Defendant: David John Cameron Speirs; Second Defendant: George Speirs
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
13 October 2014
Procedural Posture
Contract Specific Performance Claim / Judgment (trial, Reserved Judgment Delivered)
Outcome
Judgment for plaintiff. Specific performance ordered; cancellation by defendant not upheld.
Legal Topics
Specific Performance, Misrepresentation, Contractual Remedies Act 1979 S7 Cancellation, Real Estate Agent Representations, Contractual Damages and Interest
Contract Law Property Law Civil Procedure Agency Law Specific Performance Misrepresentation Contractual Remedies Act 1979 S7 Cancellation Real Estate Agent Representations +1 more

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

BFMG Limited

Plaintiff

David John Cameron Speirs

First Defendant

George Speirs

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Contract Specific Performance Claim / Judgment (trial, Reserved Judgment Delivered)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a representation was made by the vendor's agents at the 25 October 2013 viewing
  2. 2 Whether any representation made amounted to a misrepresentation inducing the purchaser to enter an unconditional contract
  3. 3 Whether the purchaser validly cancelled the contract under s7 of the Contractual Remedies Act 1979

Ratio Decidendi

Court found the purchaser's evidence that an engineer/EQC inspection representation was made was implausible and rejected it; alternatively any information conveyed was substantially true; therefore no actionable misrepresentation or right to cancel arose and plaintiff entitled to specific performance and contractual damages including contractual interest and outgoings.

Court Disposition

Judgment for plaintiff. Specific performance ordered; cancellation by defendant not upheld.

Orders

  • Order for specific performance of the contract for sale of 6 Palliser Road, Roseneath dated 25 October 2013 in favour of the plaintiff.
  • Award of late interest at the rate of $473.38 per day from 25 January 2014 to the date on which settlement is effected under order (a).