Cases - St Marylebone Property Co Ltd v Payne

Record details

Name

St Marylebone Property Co Ltd v Payne

Date

[1994]

Citation

45 EG 156 CC

Keywords

Estate agency

Summary

Arrows were drawn on a photograph in auction particulars to indicate the property to be auctioned. One of the arrows was in the wrong place and indicated that a substantial and imposing door belonging to the adjacent property was part of the sale property. When the purchaser discovered the mistake he claimed the return of his deposit. The conditions of sale incorporated certain 'notices', one of which stated that:

'... any arrows on photographs in the particulars are to enable prospective purchasers to locate the property and are not intended to depict the interest or the extent thereof to be disposed of'.

The judge held that this meant first, that the arrows are not inch perfect and, second, that they do not identify boundaries or interest in boundary features such as party walls. In any case, he found that the description of the property in the particulars was part of the conditions of sale which prevailed, in the case of conflict, with the 'notices'. So he held that there was a material and substantial misdescription entitling the purchaser to rescind the contract. In case there was an appeal on this point, the judge also held that the position of the arrows amounted to a misrepresentation and that clauses in the contract which purported to exclude liability for errors were not fair and reasonable in the circumstances of the case.