Cases - Cunningham v Herbert Fulford & Chorley

Record details

Name

Cunningham v Herbert Fulford & Chorley

Date

[1958]

Citation

EGD 324

Keywords

Estate agency

Summary

The defendants were employed to find a tenant for the plaintiff. The defendants obtained a reference from the prospective tenant's employer which appeared to be satisfactory. The tenant turned out to be a man of no substance or scruple who disappeared owing a good deal of rent and unpaid telephone and electricity bills. The plaintiff claimed that the defendants had been negligent in not making further enquiries when they discovered that the prospective tenant had no bank account. An enquiry with the tenant's supposed former landlord would have revealed that the landlord had never heard of him.

The judge at first instance found the defendants had taken reasonable care to find a solvent tenant, but it is obvious that the Court of Appeal was unhappy with this decision and regarded the approach of the defendants as 'a bit casual'. Lord Justice Parke stated that, if the Court of Appeal was able to substitute inferences of fact for those drawn by the judge, he might well have drawn the opposite inference. However, as it could not be said that there was no evidence upon which the judge could conclude that there had been no negligence, the court could not interfere with the judge's finding of fact. Reluctantly awarding costs to the defendants, Lord Justice Evershed hoped they would not enforce the order, noting that if they did 'it would be a still worse advertisement for them than they had already achieved'.

In passing, the court did not demur from the judge's finding that the defendants' failure to get the tenancy agreement stamped was a breach of duty, though leading to no loss in this case.