The fact that a property sold “as is” had previously been infested with silverfish did not entitle the buyers to a price reduction. This was established in a recent judgment by the Supreme Court.
The sellers had remedied the issue through a pest control company. Based on the company’s reports and the methods used, it had to be concluded that the property had been cleared of silverfish. No diminution in value resulting from the risk of a future recurrence of the infestation had been “substantiated”, cf. Section 4-12(2) of the Alienation Act. Consequently, there was no basis for a price reduction on account of any so-called residual defect.
Nor were the buyers entitled to a price reduction for the temporary inconvenience they experienced while the sellers carried out the remedial measures. The eradication of the silverfish had been completed within a reasonable time and without causing unreasonable inconvenience to the buyers, as required by Sections 4-10(1) and 4-10(3) of the Alienation Act. Through the remedial action, the contractual balance between the parties had been restored, and there was therefore no basis for a price reduction in respect of those inconveniences.
The Supreme Court’s decision clarifies the significance of a property having previously been affected by silverfish and whether buyers may claim a price reduction for temporary loss of use or inconvenience associated with remedial measures.
Source: Supreme Court
Bjørnar Oust
boust@melo.no
+47 480 42 931
