A devise of ‘all my leasehold farm-house, homestead, lands, and tenements at Headington, containing about 170 acres, held under Magdalen College, Oxford, and now in the occupation of Thomas Burrows’ was construed as excluding two parcels of land not occupied by Thomas Burrows at Headington, the words relating to the acreage being rejected as a false description. The court considered the maxim ‘that if there be an adequate and sufficient description, with convenient certainty of what was meant to pass, a subsequent erroneous addition will not vitiate it. The characteristic of cases within the rule is that the description, so far as it is false, applies to no subject at all; and so far as it is true, applies to one only.’
Judges:
Alderson B
Citations:
(1849) Exch 591, [1849] EngR 1242, (1849) 4 Exch 591, (1849) 154 ER 1350
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Rogers and Another v Freeguard and Another CA 19-Oct-1998
The parties had drawn up and executed an option agreement. When a court considered an option to purchase ‘land known as . .’, it was able to consider extrinsic evidence to establish just what was included where the identification in the deed was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Land
Updated: 25 November 2022; Ref: scu.197726