Kelly v Park Hall School Ltd
| Jurisdiction | Ireland |
| Judge | Henchy J. |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1979 |
| Neutral Citation | 1978 WJSC-SC 1543 |
| Docket Number | No. 2382P/1978,[1978 No. 2382 P.] |
| Court | Supreme Court |
| Date | 01 January 1979 |
1978 WJSC-SC 1543
Henchy J.
Kenny J.
Parke J.
THE SUPREME COURT
Judgment of Henchy J. (nem diss) delivered the 7th December 1978
In December 1977 the defendant school had 5 1/2 acres of land at Monkstown, Co. Dublin, for sale. The school board had applied for planning permission which, if granted, would have made the lands more valuable. But they could not wait for a decision on their planning application. Their financial situation was such that their bankers were pressing them for an immediate reduction of their overdraft. So they decided to sell without the planning permission.
Mr. Whittaker of Lisney & Co., a Dublin firm of estate agents, was acting for the vendors. He was in negotiation with the plaintiff. The plaintiff had earlier bought adjoining lands from the vendors and was anxious to buy these lands. He made Mr. Whittaker an offer of £175,000 for them. Having taken instructions from his principals, Mr. Whittaker entered into further negotiations with the plaintiff, as a result of which he made an oral agreement for the sale of the lands to the plaintiff. In a letter dated the 19 December 1977, signed by Mr. Whittaker and sent by him to a financial adviser to the school board, he set out the agreement arrived at as follows:
"Further to our telephone conversation this morning I confirm that we have agreed terms, subject to contract, for the sale of these lands to Mr. Paddy Kelly of Berkeley Homes Ltd., who were the purchasers of the front lands. The principal terms to be included in the contract for sale are as follows:-
"Proposed purchaser: Hickey Beauchamp"
Kirwan & O'Reilly (In Trust).
"Proposed price: £175,000"
"A non-returnable deposit of £30,000 to be paid on exchange of contracts, the balance to be paid not later than 6 months thereafter with interest at 12% from the contract date until the closing date.
"I am sending a copy of this letter to Mr. Haugh of A. & L. Goodbody [solicitors for the vendors] and perhaps you could kindly j confirm instructions to him on behalf of the [School] Committee"
There seems to be little doubt but that the vendors approved the agreement recorded in that letter. At the very least, nothing has emerged to suggest that they repudiated it.
The judge has found as a fact that the oral agreement covered all necessary terms and that no further negotiations were required. It is impossible to gainsay that finding. The plaintiff was familiar with the title, having a short time before bought adjoining lands on the same title from the vendors. If the vendors" solicitors had been able to forward a contract forthwith, the sale would have gone through without a hitch.
Christmas holidays, however, intervened. That and some difficulty in getting a map prepared for annexation to the contract delayed the sending out of the contract. Eventually, the vendor" solicitors sent it to the purchaser's solicitors on the 13th January 1978 with an accompanying letter which said:
"On the instructions of our clients, this offer remains open for acceptance by your clients for a period of seven days only from the date of this letter and we are instructed that, if the contract is not back with us...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Mulhall v Haren
...the existence of a concluded contract. 70 The next decision to which reference must be made is Kelly .v. Park Hall Schools Ltd. ( 113 I.L.T.R. 9). In that case again the trial Judge (Mr. Justice Hamilton) found that there was a concluded oral contract for the sale of the land. Two document......
-
Boyle v Lee
...language inconsistent with the existence of a concluded agreement such as "subject to contract", (ii) that Kelly v. Park Hall SchoolIR [1979] I.R. 340 and Casey v. Irish Intercontinental BankIR [1979] I.R. 364 were exceptional cases within that statement of principle, (iii) that support for......
- Lim Keng Siong v Yeo Ah Tee, FC
-
O'Connor (plaintiff) v P. Elliott and Company Ltd
...QBD 335 MCGRATH EVIDENCE 2005 PARA 10.116-10.119 MCDERMOTT CONTRACT LAW 2001 81 WINN v BULL 1877-78 7 CH D 29 KELLY v PARK HALL SCHOOL LTD 1979 IR 340 MULHALL v HAREN 1981 IR 364 1981/6/985 BOYLE v LEE & GOYNS 1992 1 IR 555 1992 ILRM 65 1991/11/2563 SUPERMACS IRL LTD & MCDONAGH v KATESAN......
-
'Contract law in Ireland' (5th Ed.) Robert Clarke (Thomson Round Hall, 2004)
...guide to all legal aspects of a contract. It is a useful source of information and guidance for students, practitioners and academics. 10 [1979] IR 340 11 [1979] IR 364 12 Hedley Byrne v Heller [1964] AC 465 13[1940] Ir. Jur. Rep. 49 ...