Bones v Robinson [2011] NICh 26 (28 September 2011)

Bones v Robinson [2011] NICh 26 (28 September 2011)

The court found a binding contract was formed at auction, the £100,000 was a deposit not a loan, and the defendant failed to prove any sham or fraud; plaintiff is entitled to succeed on the claim for specific performance or damages.

Citation
[2011] NICh 26
Parties
Plaintiff: Anne Bones; Defendant: Stephen Robinson
Jurisdiction
Northern Ireland
Judgment Date
28 September 2011
Procedural Posture
Civil / Trial Judgment
Outcome
judgment for plaintiff
Legal Topics
Specific Performance, Breach of Contract, Deposit, Auction Sale, Nomination of Purchaser
Property Law Contract Law Specific Performance Breach of Contract Deposit Auction Sale Nomination of Purchaser

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

Parties

Anne Bones

Plaintiff

Stephen Robinson

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Trial Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a binding contract for sale was formed at auction
  2. 2 Whether the £100,000 payment was a deposit or a loan
  3. 3 Whether the defendant is liable for specific performance or damages

Ratio Decidendi

The court found a binding contract was formed at auction, the £100,000 was a deposit not a loan, and the defendant failed to prove any sham or fraud; plaintiff is entitled to succeed on the claim for specific performance or damages.

Court Disposition

judgment for plaintiff

Orders

  • Defendant required to specifically perform the contract or, in the alternative, pay damages for breach of contract.