Patel & Anor v Hooper & Jackson (A Firm), Court of Appeal - Civil Division, November 10, 1998, [1998] EWCA Civ 1734,[1999] 1 WLR 1792
Linked as:
Extract
Patel & Anor v Hooper & Jackson (A Firm), Court of Appeal - Civil Division, November 10, 1998, [1998] EWCA Civ 1734,[1999] 1 WLR 1792
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE QBENF 97/0193/1COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION)ON APPEAL FROM THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICEQUEEN'S BENCH DIVISIONOFFICIAL REFEREE'S BUSINESS(Mr Recorder Colin Reese QC) Royal Courts of Justice Strand, London WC2 Tuesday, 10th November 1998 B e f o r e : LORD JUSTICE NOURSE LORD JUSTICE WARD and LORD JUSTICE MANTELL -------------------- UMANG JASHBAI PATEL and SUSAN PATEL Plaintiffs/Respondents -v- HOOPER & JACKSON Defendants/Appellants -------------------- Handed down Judgment Smith Bernal Reporting Limited 180 Fleet Street London EC4A 2HG Tel: 0171 421 4040 Fax: 0171 831 8838 (Official Shorthand Writers to the Court) --------------------MR D WORSLEY (instructed by Messrs Lloyd Cooper, London W1) appeared on behalf of the Appellant Defendants.MR A MARSDEN (instructed by Messrs Bankes Ashton, Bury St Edmunds) appeared on behalf of the Respondent Plaintiffs. -------------------- J U D G M E N T (As Approved by the Court) Crown Copyright Tuesday, 10th November 1998LORD JUSTICE NOURSE: This is a dispute about the amount of damages to be awarded against surveyors who made a negligent overvaluation of a house for mortgage purposes on which the purchasers also relied. The surveyors expressed the opinion that the value of the house was in the region of £90,000, whereas its actual value was £65,000. The purchasers say that the house was uninhabitable and, further, that they were unable to resell it. They never moved in and they retain it to this day. The surveyors now accept that they are liable to the purchasers for damages equivalent to the diminution in value plus stamp duty (a total of £25,250). Their principal complaint is that the judge in the court below, Mr Recorder Colin Reese QC, has awarded the purchasers further damages equivalent to an indemnity for past and future mortgage interest, endowment policy premiums and household insurance premiums. They say that that part of his award was contrary to principle and ought to be discharged. The recorder gave a full and careful judgment, of which the transcript runs to some 67 pages. Because the issues have narrowed in this court...See the full content of this document
Sponsored links
