Berkeley Community Villages and Berkeley Group PLC v Fred Daniel Pullen and others [electronic resource]
Language: English Publication details: 2007Subject(s): Online resources: Summary: [2007] EWHC 1330 (Ch). 7 June 2007. Drafting legal documents, including leases and contracts, must clarify the rights and obligations of the parties. Practitioners should also be aware of how the court will interpret such documents and what evidence is admissible in court. A property developer claimant (B) sought a declaration that the defendant farmers (P) were not entitled to sell or dispose land subject to a mutual agreement before planning permission for development, and an injunction against any sale. P counterclaimed there was no restriction on an entitlement to dispose of their interest in the land and asked for draft consultancy agreements to be considered by the court. Held: judgement for claimants. The intended sale by P would be a breach of the agreement which obliged the parties to act reasonably and in good faith. B had enhanced the land value at some expense. P had made no offer to pay B a reasonable fee which a third party would not be obliged to pay. Draft agreements are not admissible in evidence. (See also L142231).| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Law report | Virtual Online | ONLINE PUBLICATION (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 142229-2001 |
[2007] EWHC 1330 (Ch). 7 June 2007. Drafting legal documents, including leases and contracts, must clarify the rights and obligations of the parties. Practitioners should also be aware of how the court will interpret such documents and what evidence is admissible in court. A property developer claimant (B) sought a declaration that the defendant farmers (P) were not entitled to sell or dispose land subject to a mutual agreement before planning permission for development, and an injunction against any sale. P counterclaimed there was no restriction on an entitlement to dispose of their interest in the land and asked for draft consultancy agreements to be considered by the court. Held: judgement for claimants. The intended sale by P would be a breach of the agreement which obliged the parties to act reasonably and in good faith. B had enhanced the land value at some expense. P had made no offer to pay B a reasonable fee which a third party would not be obliged to pay. Draft agreements are not admissible in evidence. (See also L142231).