Hiking trail across a holiday property did not constitute a defect

After the sale of a holiday property by the sea, the municipality adopted a municipal sub-plan under which a hiking trail along the sea was to run across the buyers' property. The Supreme Court denied the buyers' claim for a discount and compensation, see section 4-18 cf. sections 4-12 and 4-14 of the Sale of Property Act. The Supreme Court based itself on the general rule that the buyer assumes the risk of the property at the time of the takeover, see section 3-1 subsection 2 cf. section 2-4 subsection 2 of the Sale of Property Act. At the time of the takeover, proposals for a hiking trail across the property had not been adopted or circulated for consultation. The buyers then had to bear the risk of a possible later decision with regard to a trail. The property was not in a significantly worse condition than the buyers had reason to expect. At the time of the takeover, it had not been possible to provide the buyers with more information about the possible trail than was stated in the sales prospectus, and no incorrect information had been provided. The sellers had then also fulfilled their duty of disclosure, see section 3-7.

Read the whole judgment (Norwegian only)

Areas of law: Contract law, sale of real property, sections 3-7 and 4-18 of the Alienation Act

Key paragraphs: 50-52, 59

Justices: Skoghøy, Matheson, Noer, Bergsjø, Sæther