Eurostaff Group is seeking a declaration that it is not obliged to complete a long lease of a flat in the
Eurostaff claims that a purported agreement for lease of flat 2701 is not valid or binding.
It says that Ballymore was assigned the vendor’s interest in the purported agreement for lease by Bantra in March 2009 as one of several agreements to lease relating to the development that had been entered into by Bantra.
Eurostaff was assigned the lessor’s interest in the purported agreement for lease by Ronadam Property & Investment in October 2007, for which it paid £66,200 to cover the first tranche of a deposit that Ronadam had paid. It then paid a further £68,200 to Bantra as the second tranche of the deposit.
However, it now claims that it was unaware at the time that the contracts earlier exchanged by Bantra and Ronadam on 7 July 2006 had differed in a key respect, namely the deadline date by which the
It says that it believed that, under clause 15 of the purported agreement for lease, it was entitled to give notice rescinding it if the development was not complete by 31 December 2008.
However, when it sought to do so, Ballymore argued that the true completion date triggering the right to rescind was 31 December 2011. This date was recorded in the version of the contract prepared by Ronadam, but the earlier date was recorded on the face of the contract prepared by Bantra.
Eurostaff argues that Ronadam and Bantra’s failure to exchange identical contracts meant that no valid and binding agreement was reached between them, and that it is entitled to walk away from the deal and have its £134,400 deposit payment returned.
Ballymore is defending the claim.
Eurostaff Group Ltd v Ballymore Millharbour Ltd – claim issued on 22 September 2010 by Blake Lapthorn.
