The legal background to this Court of Appeal decision is reviewed by John Murdoch in
Q In a survey carried out last year, my firm failed to report certain defects that admittedly should have been reported. The client buyer is now claiming some £20,000 spent by him on putting those defects right. We are reluctant to allow the claim because we can readily show that the revelation of those defects would not have deterred a willing buyer from paying the same price as paid by our client. Are we right in law?
A Yes: see Smith v Peter North & Partners [2001] EWCA Civ 1553; [2001] 42 EG 138 (CS), holding that a costs-of-repair measure was inappropriate in the kind of situation you have described.
The legal background to this Court of Appeal decision is reviewed by John Murdoch in Court holds line on damages Estates Gazette 22 June 2002, p149.
