Mark Pawlowski asks whether there is a duty to disclose the gruesome history of a house on the sale of a property
- Can lessons be learnt from other jurisdictions to improve the UK’s interpretation of the caveat emptor rule, in favour of more open disclosure from sellers of property?
Does a purchaser who is not informed by the seller of the unpleasant happenings at the property have a right to rescind the contract of sale or, alternatively, claim damages for misrepresentation? An obvious obstacle facing the purchaser in such cases is the caveat emptor rule which places the burden squarely on the purchaser to discover matters affecting the quality or enjoyment of the land which he is buying.
States of affairs
Significantly, the American courts have been prepared to create an exception to the rule where a state of affairs exists which materially impairs the value of the property and is peculiarly within the vendor’s knowledge or unlikely to be discovered by a prudent purchaser exercising due care in making inquiries.
In Stambovsky v Ackley (see, [1992] Conv. 8-15), the purchaser
