- Payment of deposit by developer not a condition precedent to exercise of option (Peacock v Imagine Property Developments)
- What are the practical implications of this case?
- What was the background?
- What did the court decide?
- Case details
Construction analysis: The Technology and Construction Court held that payment of a deposit was not a condition precedent to exercising an option for the purchase and development of land. Further, the owners had waived the requirement for the developer to pay the deposit (or were estopped from insisting on such payment). Accordingly, the owners were in repudiatory breach by refusing to accept the exercise of the option, and were liable to the developer for loss of profit.
Sign in or take a trial to read the full analysis.
To continue reading this news article, as well as thousands of others like it, sign in to LexisPSL or register for a free trial