United States: The Impact Of Princes Point v. Muss Development Decision

Sellers of U.S. commercial real estate typically agree to make a number of representations, warranties and covenants in the associated purchase and sale contract. The substance and breadth of those undertakings are usually heavily negotiated by sellers and buyers. This issue was recently highlighted in a decision earlier this year by the New York Appellate Division, First Department, in the case of Princes Point LLC v. Muss Development LLC.

Commercial real estate acquisitions in the U.S. are generally completed on an "as-is" basis premised on the deep-rooted real estate doctrine of caveat emptor (or buyer beware). Sellers as a result tend to resist and stridently argue against making any representation, warranty or covenant about the subject property or properties unless it is considered a material inducement to a buyer's entering into the contract or cannot otherwise be determined by a buyer through inspection and customary due diligence methods. The consequence of this is a limited set of seller representations, warranties and covenants in the contract, which are often weightily relied upon by the buyer in its ultimate decision to enter into the contract and proceed with the transaction.

If a representation and warranty made by the seller when the purchase and sale contract is signed is discovered to be materially false prior to the closing of the transaction, subject to the terms of the purchase and sale contract, the buyer might bring a legal action under common law against the seller seeking to rescind or void the contract on the grounds that the buyer would not have entered into the contract if the falsehood or misrepresentation was known by it at the time of contract execution. However, buyers of New York commercial real estate and their advisors should take caution before bringing an action for rescission prior to the closing date as it might have the unintended and devastating effect of constituting an anticipatory breach by the buyer. The New York Appellate Division, First Department, came to that conclusion earlier this year in Princes Point LLC v. Muss Development LLC. The case, however, is pending review by the Court of Appeals after the non-prevailing buyer's motion to New York's highest court to appeal the decision was recently granted.

Anticipatory breach, also known as repudiation or anticipatory repudiation, is a fundamental and long-standing principle of contract law. It is essentially a statement or an act by a party to a contract that indicates either that party's intent to breach or inability to perform a promise. Anticipatory breach occurs before performance under the contract is due, but is nonetheless deemed a breach as a matter of law.

Some jurisdictions implement different standards for determining when anticipatory breach has occurred. The "relaxed standard" under the Restatement (Second) of Contracts and the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) requires that the statement or act be sufficiently positive to be reasonably interpreted to mean that the party will not or cannot perform. This differs from the "traditional standard," which requires that the statement or act be clear and unequivocal. New York has historically followed the traditional standard. In any case, once a party has in effect indicated its intent to breach or inability to perform, an anticipatory breach is deemed to have occurred. The other party is then entitled to seek remedy or rescission. Since there are a multitude of ways in which a party could show intent to breach or inability to perform, whether a particular statement or act constitutes anticipatory breach is susceptible to uncertainty and dispute and therefore litigation. Until Princes Point, however, New York courts have never addressed whether a legal action for rescission can constitute anticipatory breach.

The facts of the Princes Point case are as follows. The subject property, a 23-acre site of waterfront land in Staten Island, had previously been listed as a hazardous waste site by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC). In order to delist it, the seller performed work at the property that included building a revetment seawall along the shoreline. The seller achieved delisting in 2001.

In 2004, the seller agreed to sell the property to the buyer for a purchase price of approximately $36m with an initial non-refundable deposit of approximately $1.9m. As a condition to the buyer's obligation to close, the seller had to deliver the property fully entitled with all municipal approvals for development on the land obtained. If the municipal approvals had not been obtained by the closing date, either party could terminate, but the deposit would then be returned to the buyer. In the event the seller terminated, the buyer could waive the municipal approvals condition and close with a reduction in the purchase price. The contract also permitted extensions by the buyer of the outside closing date for up to six times, provided the buyer paid an additional deposit of $200,000 per extension.

The seller experienced difficulty obtaining the municipal approvals. In 2005, after the effects of Hurricane Katrina, the DEC inspected the revetment seawall and determined that it required further work before it would grant the municipal approvals. The seller notified the buyer that it could not obtain the municipal approvals by the outside closing date and intended to exercise its termination option, except that the seller would be willing to extend the outside closing date if the buyer agreed to the following:

  1. an increase in the purchase price to approximately $38m;
  2. an increase in the deposit to approximately $4m;
  3. the reimbursement of half the costs incurred by the seller thereafter to obtain the municipal approvals; and
  4. the waiver by the buyer of any legal action against the seller in the event the municipal approvals were not issued or the work needed to acquire them were not completed by the new outside closing date. The buyer agreed to the revised terms, and in 2006 the parties amended the contract accordingly.

The issues with the revetment seawall continued. Soon after the parties entered into the 2006 amendment, the DEC found material issues with the construction of the revetment seawall. The parties extended the outside closing date several more times. Prior to the new outside closing date and the completion by the seller of the additional revetment seawall work, the buyer brought suit.

The buyer's complaint alleged that the seller had induced the buyer into entering into the contract based on the seller's fraud and misrepresentation that the revetment seawall had been built in accordance with the DEC's specifications. The buyer also claimed that the seller failed to obtain the municipal approvals because the seller had deliberately and willfully failed to construct the revetment seawall in accordance with the DEC-approved design. The buyer therefore sought rescission of the 2006 amendment and specific performance of the 2004 purchase contract.

The seller counterclaimed, arguing that the buyer breached the contract by bringing suit, which was a violation of the buyer's waiver to do so under the 2006 amendment. The buyer's claims were dismissed. The seller's counterclaims, on the other hand, were granted. The Supreme Court, New York County, found that the buyer anticipatorily breached the contract by commencing a rescission action prior to the closing of the transaction, thereby entitling the seller to terminate the contract and retain the full amount of the deposit and payment of significant fees. The buyer appealed the Supreme Court's decision. The issue on appeal was whether the buyer anticipatorily breached by seeking rescission of the contract and, if so, whether the seller was then required to show that it was ready, willing and able to complete the sale in order to retain the deposit and other liquidated damages. The Appellate Division, First Department, affirmed the Supreme Court's decision.

The Appellate Division found that by seeking rescission the buyer evidenced its intent to declare the contract void and eliminate its duty to perform the contract. A rescission action, noted the court, unequivocally evinces the plaintiff 's intent to disavow its contractual obligations, and therefore commencement of such an action before the date of performance constitutes an anticipatory breach. The Appellate Division also found that the seller was not required to show that it was ready, willing and able to complete the sale because the buyer's anticipatory breach relieved it of further contractual obligations.

The decision in Princes Point is noteworthy. The decision could have a chilling effect on real estate buyers seeking to challenge a contract prior to the closing date on the basis of fraud or misrepresentation. This is because buyers of real estate stand to lose their deposits, which in real estate acquisitions can represent a considerable percentage of the purchase price. The Princes Point buyer, for example, had deposited an amount representing approximately 10% of the purchase price.

The court in Princes Point distinguished an action for rescission from other cases involving plaintiffs seeking declaratory relief. Such other cases have held that actions seeking declaratory judgment as to a contract do not constitute anticipatory breach since declaratory judgment suits only serve to clarify the parties' rights. By contrast, the Appellate Division reasoned, in seeking rescission, the buyer sought to nullify the agreement entirely. As such, the Appellate Division found rescission suits to be "markedly different" from declaratory judgment suits, thereby constituting anticipatory breach. Thus, the use of declaratory judgment actions could be viewed as a safe harbor for real estate buyers in bringing claims prior to the closing date.

However, it is unclear based on the Princes Point decision whether a rescission claim will in all cases constitute repudiation. The particular facts in Princes Point seemed to have tipped the scales in favor of the seller. The Princes Point buyer waived all legal claims against the seller for failure to obtain the municipal approvals or complete the work needed to acquire them. The Princes Point buyer also agreed to a number of closing date extensions, even after the issues with the revetment seawall became well known.

The Princes Point buyer could have waited until the new outside closing date to terminate and receive a return of its deposit or waive the condition and close with an abatement to the purchase price should the condition to deliver the property with all municipal approvals had not been satisfied (in lieu of bringing its recession claim in advance of the closing date essentially based on the same concerns). Neither the 2004 purchase contract nor the 2006 amendment contained any representation by the seller in respect of the revetment seawall, or for that matter any representation by the seller as to the physical condition of the property. The 2006 amendment increased the purchase price, increased the deposit and afforded the seller a reimbursement of half the costs incurred in obtaining the municipal approvals likely because both parties were aware of DEC's concerns and that additional work was required to the revetment seawall. These and others were damning facts to the Princes Point buyer's case.

New York follows the "traditional standard," requiring an unequivocal statement or act. While filing suit is suggestive of a refusal to perform, it seems premature to declare that it is in all cases sufficiently unequivocal to constitute repudiation. One could argue that until rescission is granted, barring other facts such as those in Princes Point, the buyer remains able to retract the suit, settle or in some other way perform under the contract.

Other jurisdictions support this view. In California, there is no implied repudiation unless the party actually puts it out of his or her power to perform. As an example of the California rule in practice, a trustee in a bankruptcy does not anticipatorily breach with respect to a promisee's claim if within a reasonable time the trustee elects to perform the contract, even though bankruptcy is presumably strongly suggestive of the promisor's inability to perform. Even the Restatement (Second) of Contracts, which endorses the "relaxed standard," provides that to constitute repudiation, a party's act must be both voluntary and affirmative, and must make it actually or apparently impossible for him or her to perform. This approach seems to thoughtfully balance the aim of protecting the rights of contracting parties and the desire promoted by the principle of anticipatory breach which is to settle disputes early.

The Princes Point holding and its forthcoming conclusion to be decided by the Court of Appeals should be closely studied because it could have a lasting impact in New York on both substantive law and commercial real estate transactions generally. Whether or not a suit for rescission constitutes an anticipatory breach is an interesting legal question, but it also raises important practical concerns as noted herein. As the Court of Appeals deliberates, these issues and others are likely being considered. Until such time there is more certainty with respect to this issue, buyers of New York commercial real estate should restrain from bringing an action for rescission prior to the closing date. Instead, buyers could elect to bring a declaratory judgment action prior to the closing without risking a finding of anticipatory breach.

Otherwise, if an earlier remedy is not necessary, buyers could allege at the closing that the seller failed to satisfy the customary closing condition that all representations and warranties made by the seller remain true and correct in all material respects. In any case, buyers should be ready at closing to perform their contractual obligations while they wait to see if the seller can perform its obligations and avoid taking any actions at or before the closing that would likely suggest an inability or unwillingness to do so.

Previously published in REFI Guest Column

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

In association with
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of www.mondaq.com

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these terms & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about Mondaq.com’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.


Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.


Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to unsubscribe@mondaq.com with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.


A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.


This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.


If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.


This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to webmaster@mondaq.com.

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to EditorialAdvisor@mondaq.com.

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at enquiries@mondaq.com.

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at problems@mondaq.com and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.