Lindars v Hutchinson

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judge: MR JUSTICE DECLAN COSTELLO
• Judgment Date: 23 July 1987
• Neutral Citation: 2000 WJSC-HC 4373
• Court: High Court
• Date: 23 July 1987

2000 WJSC-HC 4373

THE HIGH COURT

No. 2723P 1986

LINDARS v. HUTCHINSON

BETWEEN

PAMELA

PLAINTIFF

and

JOHN HUTCHINSON

DEFENDANT

Words & Phrases:

F

Subject Headings:

*

1 JUDGMENT DELIVERED BY THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE DECLAN COSTELLO ON 23 JULY 1987

APPEARANCES

Noel Peart, SC)

Raymond Comyn, BL)

For the Plaintiff

Instructed by

J H McCarroll & Co.

27 Upper Ormond Quay

Dublin 7

Mr O'Neill, BL)

For the Defendant

Instructed by

John Lanigan & Nolan

27 South Frederick Street

Dublin 2

2 These proceedings arise out of a contract for sale dated 5th April 1984. The Plaintiff's claim is that the Defendant had repudiated the contract and a declaration is sought to this effect.

3 The Plaintiff's claim depends to a very considerable extent, if not wholly, on my accepting the evidence of Mr Delahunt, the auctioneer who handled the matter. I am sure that Mr Delahunt, who is a very experienced auctioneer, is endeavouring to tell me the truth as he recalls it, but I think his memory is infirm in relation to the events of that time, which is perfectly understandable in view of the length of time that has elapsed and the number of contracts with which he must have been involved since then.

4 On the other hand I think Mr Hutchinson's memory is clear and precise in relation to the events. Furthermore, the correspondence is consistent with his account, and the acts which he performed in relation to the contract are also consistent with his version of events.

5 In the circumstances I do not think there was any question of repudiation of the contract by Mr Hutchinson. On the contrary, I think he was anxious for the contract to go through.

6 However, a very long delay occurred due to a claim made by a Mr McVey, the owner of a former forge on the property, to certain land adjacent to the forge, particularly to the gateway to the property purchased by Mr Hutchinson, and this matter took a very long time to resolve. Furthermore, during this period Mr Hutchinson became ill and this meant that the progress of the dispute concerning the gateway and the adjoining land took much longer than it should have taken. During this period, however, I am quite satisfied that Mr Hutchinson did not in any way repudiate or revoke the contract. I am satisfied that Mr Hutchinson was anxious and willing to close as soon as this matter had been resolved and I do not think the Plaintiff was entitled to resell the property as she...