Gregory v Shepherds (a firm)
Series: Estates Gazette ; (0050) 16 December 2000, 100-107(8)Publication details: 2000Subject(s): Summary: CA 16 June 2000. In March 1989 Mr Gregory (G) contracted with a Spanish company for the purchase of an apartment. G subsequently instructed Shepherds (S), a firm of solicitors in Birmingham, to act for him over the purchase. A Spanish lawyer was also instructed at S's suggestion. The apartment was paid for but, due to the existence of a prior charge, G was not registered as the owner. The existence of the prior charge only came to light when G came to sell the property in 1991. The apartment could not be put up for sale until the charge had been vacated, in June 1999; the apartment was eventually sold in January 2000. G alleged that S had been negligent in failing to carry out the necessary searches and to ensure the Spanish lawyer had undertaken adequate searches before the purchase money was handed over. The trial judge rejected both contentions: G appealed. Appeal allowed.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Journal article | London Journal article | ABS63342 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 110173-1001 |
CA 16 June 2000. In March 1989 Mr Gregory (G) contracted with a Spanish company for the purchase of an apartment. G subsequently instructed Shepherds (S), a firm of solicitors in Birmingham, to act for him over the purchase. A Spanish lawyer was also instructed at S's suggestion. The apartment was paid for but, due to the existence of a prior charge, G was not registered as the owner. The existence of the prior charge only came to light when G came to sell the property in 1991. The apartment could not be put up for sale until the charge had been vacated, in June 1999; the apartment was eventually sold in January 2000. G alleged that S had been negligent in failing to carry out the necessary searches and to ensure the Spanish lawyer had undertaken adequate searches before the purchase money was handed over. The trial judge rejected both contentions: G appealed. Appeal allowed.