A Collection is a selection of features, articles, comments and opinions on any given theme or topic. It allows you to stay up‑to‑date with what interests you most.
Login here to access your saved articles and followed authors.
We have sent you an email so you can reset your password.
Sorry, we had a problem.
Tags related to this article
Published 26 febrero 2016
International law firm DAC Beachcroft's London Commercial Litigation team has secured a significant win for property investment client, Greenridge, in a reported case involving fraudulent misrepresentations made prior to a property contract.
Greenridge had rescinded the contract and issued proceedings for the return of the deposit, together with damages.
After a two-year battle and a five-day trial, Mr Justice Newey found that the replies to pre-contractual enquiries (the CPSEs) contained fraudulent or reckless misrepresentations that had induced Greenridge to enter into the contract. The Defendant was ordered to return the deposit together with damages for deceit.
Having beaten the Part 36 offer made in advance of trial, Greenridge also claimed the benefits of CPR 36, including an uplift on damages of the maximum allowed under this head of £75,000 and interest at a rate of 10.5% for a certain period. The matter later settled on favourable terms to DAC Beachcroft's client.
Greenridge is an existing client of DAC Beachcroft's London Commercial Property team led by Partner, Sakis Tombolis. The company is an investor in income-producing commercial real estate in the UK and has had a strong year, with completed deals in 2015 exceeding £227 million.
As well as investing its own capital, Greenridge offer investors the ability to partner with them and co-invest via their conventional or Sharia’h platforms. It anticipates having a busy 2016 with assistance for a number of transactions being provided by DAC Beachcroft's London Commercial Property Team.
DAC Beachcroft solicitor, Lisa Skipp, advised Greenridge in the High Court. She said: "The value of utilising CPSEs would be severely undermined if parties were able to conceal or gloss over pertinent information in an effort to attract a buyer or prevent a reduction on price. This decision is a welcome reminder for sellers that they must ensure that appropriate investigations are undertaken and accurate answers provided when compiling replies to CPSEs."