Judgment had been obtained. An order was in preparation for specific performance of an option over land. The parties were unable to agree the form of the order, and it was relisted.
Held: The Freeguards’ objections to the proposed form had no substance, and the form proposed was implemented.
Judges:
Lord Justice Peter Gibson Lord Justice Thorpe And Lord Justice Waller
Citations:
[1999] EWCA Civ 658
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
See Also – 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 . .
See Also – Freeguard and another v Rogers and another CA 31-Mar-1999
After protracted, complicated and bitter litigation, ‘To put the matter quite briefly, Mr and Mrs Rogers’s solicitors appear to be taking advantage rightly or wrongly – and if they have a legal right to do so, of course they have a right to do so – . .
Cited by:
See also – 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 . .
See Also – Freeguard and another v Rogers and another CA 31-Mar-1999
After protracted, complicated and bitter litigation, ‘To put the matter quite briefly, Mr and Mrs Rogers’s solicitors appear to be taking advantage rightly or wrongly – and if they have a legal right to do so, of course they have a right to do so – . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Land, Contract
Updated: 30 May 2022; Ref: scu.145573