Hulton v Hulton: CA 1917

A wife sought to rescind a separation deed for fraudulent misrepresentation. As part of the terms of the deed the litigation documents had been destroyed.
Held: This was not a bar to rescission, because: ‘it was the defendant who was anxious that those letters should be destroyed. I cannot in those circumstances treat the letters as so important to him that there can be no rescission because they cannot be brought back into existence.’

Judges:

Scrutton LJ

Citations:

[1917] 1 KB 813

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedHalpern and others v Halpern and Another (No 2) CA 3-Apr-2007
The parties had settled by compromise a dispute about the implementation of a will before the Beth Din. It was now said that the compromise agreement had been entered into under duress and was unenforceable. The defendant said that rescission could . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contract, Family

Updated: 28 July 2022; Ref: scu.253431