Farley v Skinner
Encyclopedia
Farley v Skinner [2001] UKHL 49 is an English contract law
case, concerning the measure and availability of damages for distress.
. Skinner carelessly answered it was not bad, when at 6 am the noise was very bad. Holding patterns formed right above the house. This distressed Mr Farley because he liked to spend early morning in the garden.
The trial judge held that Mr Farley had paid no more than someone who knew of the noise, so there was no financial loss, but awarded £10,000 for distress. The Court of Appeal disagreed and wiped out the award.
Lord Scott held that if Mr Farley had known about the aircraft noise he would not have bought the property. He could either claim for being deprived of the contractual benefit (Ruxley Electronics Ltd v Forsyth), or he could claim as having consequential loss on breach of contract (Watts v Morrow). He added that if there had been an appreciable reduction in the house’s market value, he could not recover both, which would have been double recovery. Although £10,000 was ‘on the high side’, the value was within the right range.
Lord Clyde said it was ‘the specific provision relating to peacefulness of the property in respect of the aircraft noise which makes the present case out of the ordinary’. The predominant object test was dispensed with, so it was enough that the term broken was known by both parties to have been important (it did not matter whether the purpose of the contract was to provide peace of mind). So it seems surveyors will not ordinarily be liable when a house is defective and it causes distress.
English contract law
English contract law is a body of law regulating contracts in England and Wales. With its roots in the lex mercatoria and the activism of the judiciary during the industrial revolution, it shares a heritage with countries across the Commonwealth , and the United States...
case, concerning the measure and availability of damages for distress.
Facts
Mr Farley bought a big house - Riverside House - in Blackboys, Sussex, not far from Gatwick. It had a croquet lawn, tennis court, orchard, paddock and swimming pool. It cost £420,000 and after purchase was complete in 28 February 1991, he spent £125,000 improving it. He also had a flat in London, a house in Brighton and one overseas. He got Mr Skinner to survey the house, particularly on aircraft noiseAircraft noise
Aircraft noise is noise pollution produced by any aircraft or its components, during various phases of a flight: on the ground while parked such as auxiliary power units, while taxiing, on run-up from propeller and jet exhaust, during take off, underneath and lateral to departure and arrival paths,...
. Skinner carelessly answered it was not bad, when at 6 am the noise was very bad. Holding patterns formed right above the house. This distressed Mr Farley because he liked to spend early morning in the garden.
The trial judge held that Mr Farley had paid no more than someone who knew of the noise, so there was no financial loss, but awarded £10,000 for distress. The Court of Appeal disagreed and wiped out the award.
Judgment
The House of Lords restored the trial judge’s award, because not being put at such inconvenience was an important term.Lord Scott held that if Mr Farley had known about the aircraft noise he would not have bought the property. He could either claim for being deprived of the contractual benefit (Ruxley Electronics Ltd v Forsyth), or he could claim as having consequential loss on breach of contract (Watts v Morrow). He added that if there had been an appreciable reduction in the house’s market value, he could not recover both, which would have been double recovery. Although £10,000 was ‘on the high side’, the value was within the right range.
‘If the cause is no more than disappointment that the contractual obligation has been broken, damages are not recoverable even if the disappointment has led to a complete mental breakdown. But, if the cause of the inconvenience or discomfort is a sensory (sight, touch, hearing, smell et) experience, damages can, subject to the remoteness rules, be recovered.’
Lord Clyde said it was ‘the specific provision relating to peacefulness of the property in respect of the aircraft noise which makes the present case out of the ordinary’. The predominant object test was dispensed with, so it was enough that the term broken was known by both parties to have been important (it did not matter whether the purpose of the contract was to provide peace of mind). So it seems surveyors will not ordinarily be liable when a house is defective and it causes distress.
See also
- English contract lawEnglish contract lawEnglish contract law is a body of law regulating contracts in England and Wales. With its roots in the lex mercatoria and the activism of the judiciary during the industrial revolution, it shares a heritage with countries across the Commonwealth , and the United States...
- Addis v Gramophone Co LtdAddis v Gramophone Co LtdAddis v Gramophone Co Ltd [1909] is an old English contract law and UK labour law case, which used to restrict damages for non-pecuniary losses for breach of contract.-Facts:...
[1909] AC 488 - Jarvis v Swans Tours LtdJarvis v Swans Tours LtdJarvis v Swans Tours Ltd [1972] is an English contract law case on the measure of damages for disappointing breaches of contract.-Facts:Mr. Jarvis was a solicitor for Barking Council. He chose to go for Christmas holiday in Switzerland. He got a brochure from Swan Tours Ltd, which for Mörlialp,...
[1973] QB 233, [1973] 1 All ER 71, where purpose of contract to obtain some mental satisfaction - Jackson v Horizon Holidays LtdJackson v Horizon Holidays LtdJackson v Horizon Holidays Ltd [1975] 1 WLR 1468 is an English contract law case, concerning the doctrine of Privity. The case would now be partly resolved by the Contracts Act 1999 section 1, allowing a third party to claim independently...
, [1975] 3 All ER 92 - Heywood v Wellers [1976] 1 QB 446, [1976] 1 All ER 300, where purpose to relieve source of distress
- Watts v Morrow [1991] 1 WLR 1421, where breach of contract caused physical inconvenience and distress
- Hayes v James & Charles Dodd (A Firm) [1990] 2 All ER 815
- Johnson v Gore Wood & Co [2002] 2 AC 1, 49, (a case actually concerning "reflective lossReflective lossReflective loss is a concept used in UK company law for losses of individual shareholders that are inseparable from general losses of the company...
" in UK company law) it was said contract breaking is an ‘incident of commercial life which players in the game are expected to meet with mental fortitude’ - Hamilton Jones v David & Snape (a firm) [2003] EWHC 3147 (Ch), Neuberger J held that £20,000 could be recovered from solicitors who negligently allowed a husband to abduct the claimant's sons to TunisiaTunisiaTunisia , officially the Tunisian RepublicThe long name of Tunisia in other languages used in the country is: , is the northernmost country in Africa. It is a Maghreb country and is bordered by Algeria to the west, Libya to the southeast, and the Mediterranean Sea to the north and east. Its area...
- Wilkes v Jessop [2007] CLY 795