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:
Cited – Halpern 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