The Supreme Court has dismissed Jones Lang LaSalle Limited’s appeal against a High Court judgment that awarded David Walsh €350,000 over inaccurate floor-area measurements in a commercial property sales brochure.
In a judgment dated 1 June 2017, Mr Justice John MacMenamin said the appeal turned mainly on factual findings about the disclaimer in the brochure and the circumstances in which purchasers would rely on its measurements. The Court upheld the High Court’s decision in full.
Mr Walsh bought the two-storey Dublin city-centre property in 2000 for IR£2,342,000. The brochure stated that the first floor measured 10,463 square feet. A later measurement found it was about 8,574 square feet. The judgment said the incorrect measurement reduced the property’s value.
The High Court found Jones Lang LaSalle liable in negligence and negligent misstatement, awarding €350,000 in damages. On appeal, the company argued, among other things, that the trial judge had given insufficient weight to evidence that prudent purchasers should measure a property themselves and that the disclaimer covered all inaccuracies.
The Supreme Court said the trial judge had heard conflicting evidence about customary practice in the Dublin property market in 2000. It declined to disturb his findings, which included that prospective purchasers did not generally commission measurement surveys before making offers and that Mr Walsh had relied on the brochure’s figures.
The brochure listed precise floor areas and said that “every care” had been taken in preparing its particulars, while also saying the information was not warranted and purchasers should satisfy themselves as to its correctness. The Court agreed with the trial judge that the clause, printed in very small type, did not clearly tell a normal reader that the precise measurements were unreliable or that the firm accepted no responsibility for them.
The Court said a disclaimer’s effect depends on its wording and context; the mere presence of a disclaimer does not automatically remove a duty of care. It concluded that the brochure and the circumstances established a duty to take reasonable care to provide accurate information, and that the inaccurate figures breached that duty.
The Court therefore dismissed the appeal and left the High Court judgment, including the €350,000 award, in place.