Search
Archive
Sign up to mailings
To keep up to date with our latest news and events, please sign up for mailings.
You are always free to unsubscribe at any time.

Jack recently acted for the successful Defendant in a 3-day trial relating to the sale of a £4M country house.
Jack was instructed to represent the seller in this unusual matter relating to a substantial transaction concerning a large property with private polo and equestrian facilities. The transaction was unique for two reasons. Firstly, the seller and buyer had considerable direct contact prior to exchange of contracts. Secondly, the buyer failed to complete the purchase on time and, as a result, completion took place months after the originally agreed completion date.
Following completion, the buyer alleged that she was induced to purchase the Property owing to a series of misrepresentations mostly in respect of the condition of the Property. The buyer failed to plead precisely the type of misrepresentations which were said to have been provided, but there were intimations of fraud and vague reference to ‘subterfuge’.
The buyer further alleged that a failure by the seller to ask his staff to leave the grounds and to remove himself and his belongings by the completion date was a breach of the duty to give vacant possession and had caused the buyer significant financial loss.
At the start of trial, Jack argued successfully that no case on fraud or deceit could be put to his client due to the insufficiency of the pleadings and secured in any event a finding at the end of trial that there was no hint of misrepresentation. The Court therefore dismissed the misrepresentation claim. The Court also accepted Jack’s submissions that the buyer had, through her actions, consented to any over-stay by the seller. As such, the entire case against the seller was dismissed.
Whilst there were no Part 36 offers in the case, Jack also secured an indemnity costs order for the benefit of his client, to cover a period of approximately two years leading up to trial.
The judge handed down judgment on 21 May 2026.
Jack was instructed by Berry Smith LLP.
For more information about Jack’s areas of practice, please click here.
Jack is an absolutely standout barrister who conducts himself in a way that far exceeds his year of call. He is pro-active, thorough, and incredibly detail-oriented. Clients appreciate his detailed, yet pragmatic, advice and his robust drafting. The quality of Jack’s work is exceptional.”
THE LEGAL 500 2026, COMMERCIAL LITIGATION
