Option to purchase
Language: English Series: EGCS ; 1989 40Publication details: 1989Subject(s): Summary: In Briargate Developments Ltd v Newprop Co Ltd , ChD 6 March 1989, it was held that the plaintiffs had transferred to Taylor Woodrow the fruits of the benefit of the option agreement, not the benefit of the agreement. Accordingly the agreement with TW was not a breach of clause 3, and not an attempt to avoid the profit-sharing requirement of clause 17. However, the defendants were not obliged to transfer their interest directly to TW as this could not be required under the terms of the agreement between the parties. The plaintiff`s claim for specific performance of the agreement to complete therefore succeeded.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| News article | London News article | WB2512-71 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 33383-1001 |
In Briargate Developments Ltd v Newprop Co Ltd , ChD 6 March 1989, it was held that the plaintiffs had transferred to Taylor Woodrow the fruits of the benefit of the option agreement, not the benefit of the agreement. Accordingly the agreement with TW was not a breach of clause 3, and not an attempt to avoid the profit-sharing requirement of clause 17. However, the defendants were not obliged to transfer their interest directly to TW as this could not be required under the terms of the agreement between the parties. The plaintiff`s claim for specific performance of the agreement to complete therefore succeeded.