Caveat vendor
Series: Solicitors' Journal ; 145(1) 12 January 2001, 12(1)Publication details: 2001Subject(s): Summary: Explains the repercussions of "Barry v Heathcote Ball & Co (Commercial Auctions) Ltd" [2000] 47 EG 178-182 (ABS63088) where the CA ruled that, in a sale by auction 'without reserve', an auctioneer is liable to the highest bidder for the difference between the bid and the market value of the lot if it is withdrawn. Notes that, whilst there is no contract of sale between the seller and the bidder in an auction before the hammer falls, this decision may open the seller to similar liability as it may be considered that there is a collateral contract.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Journal article | London Journal article | ABS63499 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 110555-1001 |
Explains the repercussions of "Barry v Heathcote Ball & Co (Commercial Auctions) Ltd" [2000] 47 EG 178-182 (ABS63088) where the CA ruled that, in a sale by auction 'without reserve', an auctioneer is liable to the highest bidder for the difference between the bid and the market value of the lot if it is withdrawn. Notes that, whilst there is no contract of sale between the seller and the bidder in an auction before the hammer falls, this decision may open the seller to similar liability as it may be considered that there is a collateral contract.