The plaintiff could claim a locus poenitentiae on the grounds of repentance because its confession to the fraud was the result of the frustration by others of its fraudulent purpose. Recovery under a contract performed unlawfully was barred once it had been partly performed.
References: (1890) 24 QBD 742
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
This case is cited by:
- Cited – 21st Century Logistic Solutions Limited (In Liquidation) v Madysen Limited QBD 17-Feb-2004
The vendor sold computers to the defendant, intending not to account to the commissioners for the VAT. The seller went into liquidation, and the liquidator sought payment. The purchaser had been unaware of the intended fraud and resisted payment. . .
([2004] EWHC 231 (QB), , Times 27-Feb-04, Gazette 25-Mar-04, [2004] BVC 779, [2004] 2 Lloyds Rep 92, [2004] STC 1535, [2004] STI 497, [2004] BTC 5720) - Cited – SQ v RQ and Another FD 31-Jul-2008
The home in which the family had lived was held in the name of a brother. Each party claimed that it was held in trust for them. Chancery proceedings had been consolidated into these ancillary relief applications. The home had been in the husband’s . .
(, [2008] EWHC 1874 (Fam), [2009] WTLR 1591, [2009] 1 P and CR DG5, [2009] Fam Law 17, (2008-09) 11 ITELR 748, [2009] 1 FLR 935)
These lists may be incomplete.
Last Update: 27 November 2020; Ref: scu.194060
