Walker v Boyle [1982] 1 All ER 634

Plaintiff wanted to buy a house from Defendant and Defendant’s husband answered one of Plaintiff’s preliminary questions by saying that there were no boundary disputes, an answer which Defendant knew was incorrect though her husband did not.

There was a contractual condition that “no errors, mis-statement, or omission in any preliminary answer…shall annul the sale.”

Dillon J held that the condition could be made either not to apply to misrepresentations through construction (it didn’t apply where the vendor had knowledge of the true answer but gave/allowed a wrong answer to be given) OR since it was voided under the Misrepresentation Act and s.11(1) UCTA. Therefore he found for Plaintiff.