There was a sale of a share in a partnership, which had become insolvent since the contract.
Held: The House ordered rescission and mutual restitution, though the misrepresentation was not fraudulent, and it gave ancillary directions so as to work out the equities. A former partner remains liable for the partnership debts incurred while he was, ‘de facto’ a member of the partnership. Lord Watson: ‘I entertain no doubt that these misrepresentations, although not fraudulently made, are sufficient to entitle the respondent to rescind the arrangement of February 1883, if he is in a position to give as well as to demand restitution.’
Judges:
Lord Watson
Citations:
(1888) 13 App Cas 308
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal from – Newbigging v Adam CA 1886
A party seeking rescission of a contract must give back all that he received. The purpose of rescission is still to restore the parties as nearly as possible to the position in which they were before the contract was made. Bowen LJ said: ‘when you . .
Cited by:
Cited – Halpern and Another v Halpern and others ComC 4-Jul-2006
The court considered whether a party can avoid a contract procured by duress in circumstances where he cannot offer the other party substantial restitutio in integrum.
Held: Unless the claimant could offer counter-restitution, the remedy of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Company
Updated: 30 April 2022; Ref: scu.214455