Damages Awarded for Fraudulent Replies to Enquiries


In Greenridge Luton One Ltd and another v Kempton Investments Ltd [2016] EWHC 91 (Ch), the High Court considered a claim that the seller’s replies to enquiries were fraudulent or reckless.

The High Court considered a claim for fraudulent misrepresentation and held that a buyer was entitled to have its deposit returned because of an untrue representation made recklessly or fraudulently that there were no service charge arrears, when in fact there were such arrears. The replies to the Commercial Property Standard Enquiries that were given to the buyer were inaccurate.

This misrepresentation resulted in the High Court also deciding to award damages for wasted costs incurred in the prospective purchase, such as professional and survey fees and other costs relating to the proposed structuring of the purchase. The High Court ruled that the buyer was entitled to damages for deceit totalling £395,948.

This case is useful in demonstrating how the courts will deal with fraudulent misrepresentation in a routine commercial situation.

Please do not hesitate to contact us on +44 (0)20 7480 5840 should you require legal assistance with any issues contained in this update. Alternatively you can contact us online

The content of this update is for the purpose of providing general legal information. It does not constitute legal advice from a solicitor and should not be treated as such.