Cases - Hill v Harris

Record details

Name

Hill v Harris

Date

[1965]

Citation

2 QB 601

Keywords

Estate agency

Summary

The defendant tenant instructed an estate agent to find a subtenant. The prospective subtenant was told by the agent that it would be all right to use the premises for the sale of confectionery and tobacco. In fact, this was prohibited by the head lease without the consent of the head landlord. So the subtenant was unable to run the business proposed, and sued the defendant for breach of warranty. (A warranty is a term of the contract.)

In the absence of any express or ostensible authority to enter a contractual arrangement, the claim failed. Lord Justice Diplock said:

'... the ostensible authority of an estate agent invited to find a purchaser for premises or a lessee for premises, does not extend to entering into any contractual relationship in respect of the premises on behalf of the person instructing him. It may well be that he has authority to make representations as to the state of the premises, but representations are a very different matter from warranty.'