Area(s) of Law :
Source : EWHC 1694 (Ch)
Contracts for sale
The parties had entered into a contract for the sale and purchase of a leasehold property, which incorporated the Standard Conditions of Sale (4th edn) and a term whereby the buyer’s deposit would be forfeit if they failed to comply with a notice to complete. The parties contractually agreed to exclude the application of s.49(2) of the LPA 1925. The buyer failed to complete and then applied to the Court for the return of the deposit. The vendor applied for summary dismissal of the application.
Held: Parties to a contract for sale of land could not exclude the LPA 1925 s.49(2) by agreement, as it did not grant the parties rights. Rather, it gave the court jurisdiction to determine questions arising out of the contract on an application by a vendor or purchaser, including whether a deposit should be repaid. Any agreement would be void as it was against public policy to allow parties to oust the jurisdiction of the court.
This content is provided free of charge for information purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice and should not be relied on as such. No responsibility for the accuracy and/or correctness of the information and commentary set out in the article, or for any consequences of relying on it, is assumed or accepted by any member of Chambers or by Chambers as a whole.
Please note that we do not give legal advice on individual cases which may relate to this content other than by way of formal instruction of a member of Hardwicke. However if you have any other queries about this content please contact: