Is a seller required to inform a potential buyer that a murder has occurred on the premises?
This unusual question was considered recently in the case of Sykes v Taylor-Rose. The buyer had asked: “Is there any information that you think the buyer has the right to know?”. The seller, who was aware of the gruesome event, answered: “No”.
Following the sale, the buyer learnt of the murder and immediately resold, disclosing the homicide. He later sought to recoup his loss from the seller. But his claim stumbled upon the caveat emptor principle. The court found that the question he had asked required the seller to disclose anything that he believed the buyer had a legal right to know, which did not include the history of the house.
Buyer beware indeed!
Related item:
Is a seller required to inform a potential buyer that a murder has occurred on the premises?
This unusual question was considered recently in the case of Sykes v Taylor-Rose. The buyer had asked: “Is there any information that you think the buyer has the right to know?”. The seller, who was aware of the gruesome event, answered: “No”.
Following the sale, the buyer learnt of the murder and immediately resold, disclosing the homicide. He later sought to recoup his loss from the seller. But his claim stumbled upon the caveat emptor principle. The court found that the question he had asked required the seller to disclose anything that he believed the buyer had a legal right to know, which did not include the history of the house.
Buyer beware indeed!
Related item:
John Laing wins lease dispute, EGi Legal News, 8 April 2004
