Disclaimer: This work was produced by one of our professional writers as a learning aid to help you with your studies.
If you would like to view other samples of the academic work produced by our writers, please click here.
Pankhania v Hackney London Borough Council  N.P.C. 123
Commercial property – Misrepresentation at sale – Commercial property
P brought a claim for damages for the misrepresentation at the point of sale by H, of commercial property that was used as a car park by NCP. The land was licenced to NCP in 1988. There was exclusive possession of the property for an agreed term which had the effect of creating a business tenancy agreement as per the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954. The documentation that had been created for sale, at an auction, referred to the land that suggested only a licence agreement was in place on the property, which could be terminated with three months’ notice. P purchased the property and found out this was not the case. P brought an action to claim for the misrepresentation of H.
H argued that any misrepresentation was a misrepresentation as to law and as per the case of Kleinwort Benson Ltd v Lincoln City Council  2 AC 349, this was not actionable. Therefore, the court had to first consider whether the wording used in the sale documentation could amount to a misrepresentation and if so, whether P could action such a claim.
The court gave a partial judgment to P. The court found that having assessed the representations made in the sale documentation, H had represented the agreement between NCP and themselves as a licence which could be terminated. This was deemed a clear misrepresentation. As for the second issue, the court found that the decision in the previous case of Kleinwort no longer applied and on this basis, P’s claim was actionable.
Related ServicesView all
DMCA / Removal Request
If you are the original writer of this essay and no longer wish to have the essay published on the UK Essays website then please: