Babie, P.2017-09-132017-09-132014Property Law Review, 2014; 4:143-1451838-3858http://hdl.handle.net/2440/107707Research paperLe Cornu and Kurda v Place on Brougham Pty Ltd [2013] SADC 32 confirms that a Vendor’s Statement is not invalid due solely to the non-existence of the property the subject of such statement. Yet, once a Vendor’s Statement is rendered invalid on other grounds, the right to cool off remains open, allowing the purchaser a choice between electing to affirm or rescission. In either case, though, the vendor retains the right to claim estoppel.enCopyright status unknownReal property; vendor's statements; right to cool offJournal article0030024995178223Babie, P. [0000-0002-9616-3300]