Parkin v. Thorol

51 Eng.Rep. 698 (1852)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

P agreed to sell a freehold estate to D. The terms of the transaction were quite explicit and quite clear in that the abstract was to be delivered within ten days and the transaction was to have the deposit paid and agreement signed and the transaction to be completed by the 25th of October. The agreement also said that if the transaction was not completed on that date that the buyer shall pay interest until the time at which the purchase is actually completed. Conditions also called for the forfeiture of the deposit if the transaction could not be completed on time. The agreements were signed and the deposit was made. The abstract was delivered but difficulties arose as a result of a settlement dated in 1804 as being mislaid. P’s solicitor sent notice of this problem on the 17th of October and said that he only required some time to find the missing settlement. D’s solicitor gave notice on the 21st that if the settlement were not produced by or before November 5th, he would treat the contract as at an end and require a return of the deposit. On November 7th, the deposit was formally demanded. On January 8, 1851, P offered to produce the deed, but D told him he was no longer interested in the property. D then sued for a return of the deposit on February 28th. On March 1st P sued for specific performance of the contract. A motion was made to stay the proceedings at law. The court held that time was of the essence and that it had not been waived. The case now came before a hearing.