Northstar Land Ltd v Maitland Brooks and Jacqueline Brooks
Language: English Publication details: 2006Subject(s): Online resources: Summary: [2006] EWCA Civ 756, 14 June 2006. Concerns a property sale transaction where the appellant purchaser (N) claimed that the vendors (B) had been estopped (from denying that the completion time had been extended) by their solicitor's conduct in not responding to the request for an extension. N had exercised its option to purchase B's property and had served notice to complete within 10 working days, but later indicated its wish to extend the deadline. Only on the day of completion did N's solicitor attempt to chase up B's solicitor to obtain agreement, but B's solicitor failed to revert back and N's solicitor did not pursue the matter. "Held": appeal dismissed. N's solicitor had not been entitled to assume that the extension of time had been agreed by omission of a negative response.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Law report | Virtual Online | ONLINE PUBLICATION (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 133959-1001 |
[2006] EWCA Civ 756, 14 June 2006. Concerns a property sale transaction where the appellant purchaser (N) claimed that the vendors (B) had been estopped (from denying that the completion time had been extended) by their solicitor's conduct in not responding to the request for an extension. N had exercised its option to purchase B's property and had served notice to complete within 10 working days, but later indicated its wish to extend the deadline. Only on the day of completion did N's solicitor attempt to chase up B's solicitor to obtain agreement, but B's solicitor failed to revert back and N's solicitor did not pursue the matter. "Held": appeal dismissed. N's solicitor had not been entitled to assume that the extension of time had been agreed by omission of a negative response.