Deposits at stake
Series: Estates Gazette ; (0228) 13 July 2002, 125(1)Publication details: 2002Subject(s): Summary: Discusses the customary purchase deposit when contracts are exchanged on a sale of land and the once common estate agent practice of seeking a small holding deposit from potential purchasers during sale negotiations, the latter sometimes resulting in agent default. Considers recent CA decision "Gribbon v Lutton" which is of considerable importance for future practice in this area, in which the defendants (L) were held to be negligent by failing to secure an enforceable bipartite agreement under which the deposit would have been forfeited had the purchaser failed to purchase the land.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| News article | London News article | WB3826-20 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 118837-1001 |
Discusses the customary purchase deposit when contracts are exchanged on a sale of land and the once common estate agent practice of seeking a small holding deposit from potential purchasers during sale negotiations, the latter sometimes resulting in agent default. Considers recent CA decision "Gribbon v Lutton" which is of considerable importance for future practice in this area, in which the defendants (L) were held to be negligent by failing to secure an enforceable bipartite agreement under which the deposit would have been forfeited had the purchaser failed to purchase the land.