Cordingley v Cheeseborough
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 28 April 1862 |
| Date | 28 April 1862 |
| Court | High Court of Chancery |
English Reports Citation: 45 E.R. 1230
BEFORE THE LORD CHANCELLOR LORD WESTBURY.
S. C. 3 Giff. 496; 31 L. J. Ch. 617; 8 Jur. (N. S.), 585, 755; 6 L. T. 15, 342. See Lett v. Randall, 1883, 49 L. T. 73. Commented on, In re Terry and White's Contract, 1886, 32 Ch. D. 15.
[379] cobdingley v. CHEESEBOROugh. Before the Lord Chancellor Lord Westbury. April 28, 1862. [S. C. 3 Giff. 496; 31 L. J. Ch. 617; 8 Jur. (N. S.), 585, 755; 6 L. T. 15, 342. See Lett v. Randall, 1883, 49 L. T. 73. Commented on, In re Terry and J'Hiite's Cmtnwt, 1886, 32 Ch. D. 15.] On a sale one of the conditions provided that if the purchasers should make any objection to, or requisition as to the title, evidence, conveyance, or as to compensation or otherwise which the vendor should be unwilling to remove or comply with, the vendor should be at liberty to vacate the sale. Another condition was that the admeasurements were presumed to be correct, but that if any error were discovered therein no allowance should be made or required either way. Another provided that if any error of any kind should be made in the description of the premises, such error should not invalidate the sale, but that compensation should be settled by a referee named in the condition. On a bill for specific performance by the purchaser with a deduction to be assessed by the referee for a deficiency in quantity of nearly one half : Held, that although the Court would not have enforced against the purchaser the condition as to erroneous admeasurements where the error was so great that condition was sufficient to exclude any right in the purchaser to a specific performance with a deduction, and the Court in his suit for that relief decreed specific performance without deduction. This was the appeal of the Plaintff from a decree of Vice-Chancellor Stuart directing simply a specific performance of an agreement entered into by the Plaintiff for a purchase, the Plaintiff by his bill having sought a specific performance with au abatement of purchase-money on the ground of deficiency in quantity of the land agreed to be purchased. The agreement was entered into at a sale by auction subject to printed particulars and conditions, in which the lot in question was described as follows :- "Lot 2. All that capital messuage or mansion-house called Westbrook House, situated in Great Horton Eoad in the township of Horton, formerly in one dwelling-house and occupied by Richard Fawcett, Esquire, but afterwards divided into two dwelling-houses one of which has been for many years occupied by Mr. William Cheesehorough and the other successively by Mr. Samuel Laycock Tee and Mr. Samuel Bottomley. The former residence has coach-house, stabling and suitable out-offices attached. The site of the mansion-house and pleasure-grounds (including a moiety of Randall Well [380] Street on the north-west, and of a certain projected 4BBO.F.&J.381. COEDINOLEY V. CHEESEBOROUGH 1231 new street on the north-east side thereof) contains au area of 7683 square yards or thereabouts." The material conditions were the following:- 10. " That in case the purchaser of any lot or his solicitor shall make any objection to or requisition as to the abstract of title, the title or the evidence thereof or the conveyance, or as to compensation or indemnity or otherwise which the vendor shall be unable or unwilling to remove or comply with, or which shall be unfounded, the vendor shall be at liberty if he think fit by notice in writing to vacate the sale, and thereupon such sale shall be absolutely null and void to all intents and purposes whatsoever, and the purchaser shall be repaid his deposit money, but without interest or costs, and each contracting party shall be placed in the same situation as if no agreement had ever beeu made, unless the purchaser shall, within fourteen days nest after the receipt of such notice from the vendor of hia intention to annul the sale, agree to accept the title unconditionally, and such right of the vendor to annul the sale as aforesaid shall not be considered as waived or in any manner affected by any negociation as to such objection or requisition or any attempt or endeavour to obviate...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Chong Ah Kwee and Another v Viva Realty Pte Ltd
...Ch D 103 (distd) Contract, In re A; Elphick and Gaw Khek Khiam [1930] SSLR 199 (refd) Cordingley v Cheeseborough (1862) 4 De G F & J 379; 45 ER 1230 (folld) Hill v Buckley (1811) 17 Ves 394; 34 ER 153 (folld) Joliffe v Baker (1883) 11 QBD 255 (distd) McKenzie v Hesketh (1877) 7 Ch D 675 (fo......
-
Lim Hun Ching and Another v Lim Ah Choon
... ... the contract that disentitles him to compensation or damages, the judge said (at p 866): ... In Cordingley v. Cheeseborough the ... purchaser sought for specific performance with an abatement of the purchase-money. The ... contract contained a clause ... ...
- Tiplady v Gold Coast Carlton Pty Ltd
-
Keating and Others v Bank of Ireland and Others
... ... Potts 1897 1 Irish Reports page 534; Cordingley .v. Cheeseborough Law Journal 1862 Volume 31 Chancery N.S. page 616 and Grant .v. Dawkins and others 1973 3 All England Reports page 897 ... 28 For ... ...