Walter Connell &c v John Hart &c [2008] ScotCS CSIH_67 (19 December 2008)

Walter Connell &c v John Hart &c [2008] ScotCS CSIH_67 (19 December 2008)

The contract required the surveyor to express an opinion that the Coal Mining Report contained something that would adversely affect mineral stability, meaning more than a mere possibility. The surveyor's opinion, as expressed in his letter, only indicated that there could or may well be an adverse effect, which does not satisfy the contractual threshold. Therefore, the defenders were not entitled to resile, and the pursuers are entitled to damages for breach of contract.

Citation
[2008] ScotCS CSIH_67
Parties
Pursuers & Respondents: Walter Connell &c; Defenders & Appellants: John Hart &c
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
19 December 2008
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Sheriff to Inner House, Court of Session
Outcome
Appeal refused; interlocutor of the Sheriff adhered to with minor amendments to findings-in-fact.
Legal Topics
Interpretation of Contract Terms, Right to Resile From Missives, Effect of Surveyor's Opinion, Coal Mining Report in Property Transactions
Contract Law Property Law Interpretation of Contract Terms Right to Resile From Missives Effect of Surveyor's Opinion Coal Mining Report in Property Transactions

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 2 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Walter Connell &c

Pursuers & Respondents

John Hart &c

Defenders & Appellants

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Sheriff to Inner House, Court of Session

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What is the correct interpretation of Condition 9 in the missives regarding the right to resile based on a surveyor's opinion?
  2. 2 Does the surveyor's opinion, as expressed, satisfy the contractual threshold for rescission?

Ratio Decidendi

The contract required the surveyor to express an opinion that the Coal Mining Report contained something that would adversely affect mineral stability, meaning more than a mere possibility. The surveyor's opinion, as expressed in his letter, only indicated that there could or may well be an adverse effect, which does not satisfy the contractual threshold. Therefore, the defenders were not entitled to resile, and the pursuers are entitled to damages for breach of contract.

Court Disposition

Appeal refused; interlocutor of the Sheriff adhered to with minor amendments to findings-in-fact.

Orders

  • Alteration to finding-in-fact 6 (typographical correction) allowed.
  • Addition to finding-in-fact 16 (full quotation from surveyor's letter) allowed.