Hoghton v Hoghton: CA 16 Apr 1852

When a person has made a large voluntary disposition the burden is thrown on the party benefitting to show that the disposition was made fairly and honestly and in full understanding of the nature and consequences of the transaction. Romilly MR discussed the ‘sacred’ nature of ‘without prejudice’ negotiation and that he would disregard ‘admissions made solely for the purpose of compromise’.
Romilly MR
(1852) 15 Beav 278, [1852] EngR 446, (1852) 15 Beav 278, (1852) 51 ER 545
Commonlii
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedBarclays Bank Plc v O’Brien and Another HL 21-Oct-1993
The wife joined in a charge on the family home to secure her husband’s business borrowings. The husband was found to have misrepresented to her the effect of the deed, and the bank had been aware that she might be reluctant to sign the deed.
CitedCutts v Head and Another CA 7-Dec-1983
There had been a trial of 35 days regarding rights of way over land, which had proved fruitless, and where some orders had been made without jurisdiction. The result had been inconclusive. The costs order was now appealed, the plaintiff complaining . .
CitedOfulue and Another v Bossert HL 11-Mar-2009
The parties disputed ownership of land, one claiming adverse possession. In the course of negotations, the possessor made a without prejudice offer to purchase the paper owner’s title. The paper owner claimed that this was an acknowledgement under . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 09 January 2021; Ref: scu.180576