Property Week quotes Georgina Muskett on the future implications of a high-profile court judgment relating to a £32.5m moth-infested mansion

A High Court legal battle, which reached a conclusion in February 2025, saw Iya Patarkatsishvili and her husband successfully sue property developer William Woodward-Fisher for £36m, on the grounds that 'swarms of moths' in the £32m mansion they bought from him in London’s upmarket Notting Hill had 'ruined their lives'.

In January, prior to the judgment, Property Week highlighted how rare it would be for a judge to rule in favour of rescission – the dissolution of a contract for reasons including misrepresentation – with many legal commentators doubting whether it was a viable option. However, last month, High Court judge Justice Fancourt ruled that the buyers had the right to hand the property back to its former owner.

Property Week explains that "the ruling is an important reminder of the need for sellers to be truthful when answering questions about their property".

Georgina Muskett, Senior Associate in our Real Estate Disputes team, gives views in a new article for Property Week on the judgment and what might come next. Georgina explains the ruling was so detailed that even if Woodward-Fisher succeeds with an appeal, it would not overturn all aspects of the ruling. She comments:

There’s lots of findings of fact in the case that are a lot more difficult to appeal, because an appeal court usually isn’t going to interfere with a trial judge’s determination on the facts.

Georgina goes on to explain that the judgment is unlikely to set a widely applicable precedent:

This doesn’t change [the meaning of] caveat emptor, but if you are asked a direct question, you have to answer honestly and give full disclosure. Fundamentally, the decision hasn’t changed the law, but the outcome in terms of the remedy is quite draconian.

Read the full article in Property Week here.