Walker v Boyle

Last updated

Walker v Boyle
CourtHigh Court, Chancery Division
Citation(s)[1982] 1 WLR 495
Keywords
Misrepresentation, exclusion clause

Walker v Boyle [1982] 1 WLR 495 is an English contract law case, concerning misrepresentation, and the possibility to exclude liability for it under the Misrepresentation Act 1967 s 3.

Contents

Facts

Mr Walker negotiated with Mrs Boyle to purchase Stall House in Stall House Lane, Pulborough, West Sussex for £105,000. During negotiations Mr Walker sent enquiries to Mr Boyle asking,

‘Is the vendor aware of any disputes regarding the boundaries, easements, covenants or other matters relating to the property or its use?’

Mrs Boyle asked her husband who answered ‘no’. But really there had been a long running dispute with the neighbour, which Mr Boyle incorrectly thought had been settled. Condition 17(1) of the contract (which incorporated the ‘National Conditions of Sale’) said that,

‘no error, misstatement or omission in any preliminary answer concerning the property shall annul the sale’.

Mr Walker brought an action for rescission based on misrepresentation. The question was whether Mr and Mrs Boyle could rely on the exclusion clause and whether it was reasonable under MA 1967 s 3.

Judgment

Dillon J held the condition fell foul of s 3 MA 1967. He held Mrs Boyle had not shown that the exclusion satisfied s 11 of the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 in this case. Neither party's solicitors directed their minds to condition 17, so it was not one which ‘ought reasonably to have been known to or in the contemplation of the parties’. He added that the National Conditions of Sale, though common, were not the product of negotiations between interested trade parties.

See also

Notes

    Related Research Articles

    <span class="mw-page-title-main">Offer and acceptance</span> Two components of agreement

    Offer and acceptance are generally recognised as essential requirements for the formation of a contract, and analysis of their operation is a traditional approach in contract law. This classical approach to contract formation has been modified by developments in the law of estoppel, misleading conduct, misrepresentation, unjust enrichment, and power of acceptance.

    <span class="mw-page-title-main">Misrepresentation</span> Untrue statement in contract negotiations

    In common law jurisdictions, a misrepresentation is a false or misleading statement of fact made during negotiations by one party to another, the statement then inducing that other party to enter into a contract. The misled party may normally rescind the contract, and sometimes may be awarded damages as well.

    <i>LEstrange v F Graucob Ltd</i>

    L'Estrange v F Graucob Ltd [1934] 2 KB 394 is a leading English contract law case on the incorporation of terms into a contract by signature. There are exceptions to the rule that a person is bound by his or her signature, including fraud, misrepresentation and non est factum.

    <span class="mw-page-title-main">Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977</span> United Kingdom legislation

    The Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 is an Act of Parliament of the United Kingdom which regulates contracts by restricting the operation and legality of some contract terms. It extends to nearly all forms of contract and one of its most important functions is limiting the applicability of disclaimers of liability. The terms extend to both actual contract terms and notices that are seen to constitute a contractual obligation.

    <span class="mw-page-title-main">English contract law</span> Law of contracts in England and Wales

    English contract law is the body of law that regulates legally binding agreements in England and Wales. With its roots in the lex mercatoria and the activism of the judiciary during the industrial revolution, it shares a heritage with countries across the Commonwealth, from membership in the European Union, continuing membership in Unidroit, and to a lesser extent the United States. Any agreement that is enforceable in court is a contract. A contract is a voluntary obligation, contrasting to the duty to not violate others rights in tort or unjust enrichment. English law places a high value on ensuring people have truly consented to the deals that bind them in court, so long as they comply with statutory and human rights.

    <span class="mw-page-title-main">Contract</span> Legally binding document establishing rights and duties between parties

    A contract is an agreement that specifies certain legally enforceable rights and obligations pertaining to two or more mutually agreeing parties. A contract typically involves the transfer of goods, services, money, or a promise to transfer any of those at a future date, and the activities and intentions of the parties entering into a contract may be referred to as contracting. In the event of a breach of contract, the injured party may seek judicial remedies such as damages or rescission. A binding agreement between actors in international law is known as a treaty.

    Contractual terms in English law is a topic which deals with four main issues.

    <i>Leaf v International Galleries</i> 1950n English contract law case

    Leaf v International Galleries [1950] 2 KB 86 is an English contract law case concerning misrepresentation, mistake and breach of contract, and the limits to the equitable remedy of rescission.

    Interpreting contracts in English law is an area of English contract law, which concerns how the courts decide what an agreement means. It is settled law that the process is based on the objective view of a reasonable person, given the context in which the contracting parties made their agreement. This approach marks a break with previous a more rigid modes of interpretation before the 1970s, where courts paid closer attention to the formal expression of the parties' intentions and took more of a literal view of what they had said.

    Dimmock v Hallett (1866–67) LR 2 Ch App 21 is an English contract law case, concerning misrepresentation.

    <i>Gordon v Selico</i>

    Gordon v Selico (1986) 18 H.L.R. 219 is an English contract law on the subject of misrepresentation by action. It was held that positive actions - in this case, the concealment of dry rot - could amount to operative misrepresentations.

    Cobbe v Yeoman's Row Management Ltd[2008] UKHL 55 is a House of Lords case in English land law and relates to proprietary estoppel in the multi-property developer context. The court of final appeal awarded the project manager £150,000 on a quantum meruit basis for unjust enrichment because Yeoman's Row had received the benefit of his services without paying for that. The court refused to find or acknowledge a binding contract, prior arrangement with a third party or promise, overturning a £2m award on the basis of a possible lien arising from a promise over the property. The court found a non-binding agreement in principle, entirely subject to the owner's final say to take into account for example their view of the market; this was the basis on the facts on which the parties were proceeding.

    <i>Howard Marine and Dredging Co Ltd v A Ogden & Sons (Excavations) Ltd</i>

    Howard Marine and Dredging Co Ltd v A Ogden & Sons (Excavations) Ltd [1978] QB 574 is an English contract law case, concerning misrepresentation. It explains the test of "reasonable grounds for belief" under the Misrepresentation Act 1967 s 2(1), and raises the issue of the reasonableness test under s 3.

    <i>Government of Zanzibar v British Aerospace (Lancaster House) Ltd</i>

    Government of Zanzibar v British Aerospace Ltd [2000] EWHC 221 (Comm) is an English contract law case, concerning misrepresentation.

    Cremdean Properties Ltd v Nash (1977) 244 EG 547 is an English contract law case, concerning misrepresentation and exclusion of liability under the Misrepresentation Act 1967 s 3.

    Overbrooke Estates Ltd v Glencombe Properties Ltd [1974] 3 All ER 511 is an English contract law case, concerning misrepresentation.

    <span class="mw-page-title-main">Supply of Goods (Implied Terms) Act 1973</span> United Kingdom legislation

    The Supply of Goods Act 1973 was an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom that provided implied terms in contracts for the supply of goods and for hire-purchase agreements, and limited the use of exclusion clauses. The result of a joint report by the England and Wales Law Commission and the Scottish Law Commission, First Report on Exemption Clauses, the Act was granted royal assent on 18 April 1973 and came into force a month later. It met with a mixed reaction from academics, who praised the additional protection it offered while at the same time questioning whether it was enough; several aspects of the Act's draftsmanship and implementation were also called into question. Much of the Act was repealed by the Sale of Goods Act 1979, which included many of the 1973 Act's provisions.

    <span class="mw-page-title-main">South African contract law</span> Law about agreements between two or more parties

    South African contract law is "essentially a modernized version of the Roman-Dutch law of contract", and is rooted in canon and Roman laws. In the broadest definition, a contract is an agreement two or more parties enter into with the serious intention of creating a legal obligation. Contract law provides a legal framework within which persons can transact business and exchange resources, secure in the knowledge that the law will uphold their agreements and, if necessary, enforce them. The law of contract underpins private enterprise in South Africa and regulates it in the interest of fair dealing.

    <i>Thompson v London, Midland and Scottish Rly Co</i>

    Thompson v London, Midland and Scottish Railway Co Ltd [1930] 1 KB 41 is an English contract law case, concerning the exclusion of liability. It was described by Lord Denning MR in George Mitchell (Chesterhall) Ltd v Finney Lock Seeds Ltd as part of "a bleak winter for our law of contract." Although the same decision would not be reached today because of the application of the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977, English courts continue to assess on an objective basis whether reasonable notice has been given of terms and conditions so as to incorporate them in the contract.

    First Tower Trustees Ltd v CDS Ltd [2018] EWCA Civ 1396 is an English contract law case, concerning the Misrepresentation Act 1967.

    References