Image from Google Jackets

Rignall Developments Ltd v Halil

Language: English Series: Estates Gazette ; 282(6338) 13 June 1987, 1414-1424(5)Publication details: 1987Subject(s): Summary: ChD 10 March 1987 A vendor and purchaser summons whereby the purchasers at auction of a freehold dwelling in Peckham, sought against the vendor, a declaration that she had failed to show a good title in accordance with the contract of sale . The purchasers, who had not searched the local land charges register prior to the auction, refused to complete unless safeguarded against risk of a claim for the recovery of an improvement grant . The vendor contended that she had shown good title, conditions in the contract providing that the purchaser was deemed to have made local searches and to have knowledge of all matters that would have been disclosed thereby. After the purchaser`s solicitors had removed the entry in the local register, they claimed specific performance on payment of the balance of the purchase price without interest, while the defendant claimed to rescind the contract and forfeit the deposit. The issue was whether the vendor had shown a good title and this depended on whe
Holdings
Item type Current library Call number Copy number Status Barcode
Law report London Journal article ABS37864 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) 1 Available 7236-1001

ChD 10 March 1987 A vendor and purchaser summons whereby the purchasers at auction of a freehold dwelling in Peckham, sought against the vendor, a declaration that she had failed to show a good title in accordance with the contract of sale . The purchasers, who had not searched the local land charges register prior to the auction, refused to complete unless safeguarded against risk of a claim for the recovery of an improvement grant . The vendor contended that she had shown good title, conditions in the contract providing that the purchaser was deemed to have made local searches and to have knowledge of all matters that would have been disclosed thereby. After the purchaser`s solicitors had removed the entry in the local register, they claimed specific performance on payment of the balance of the purchase price without interest, while the defendant claimed to rescind the contract and forfeit the deposit. The issue was whether the vendor had shown a good title and this depended on whe