Lloyd v Stanbury: 1971

A purchaser who had been let into possession before completion and had spent money on improvements to the property was not entitled to claim for such expenses because they would not usually have been within the contemplation of the parties. As to rectification: ‘If, therefore, the defence of rectification is to succeed I must be convinced that it was not the intention either of Mr Stanbury or of Mr Lloyd that 1428 [that is a parcel of land] should be included in the contract. It is not sufficient that there should be convincing proof that the written contract did not represent the true intention of the parties. I must also be satisfied that there was a common intention and I emphasise a common intention, of Mr Stanbury and Mr Lloyd that 1428 should be excluded.’

Judges:

Brightman J

Citations:

[1971] 1 WLR 535, [1971] 2 All ER 267

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

ApprovedAnglia Television v Oliver Reed CA 1971
The television company had agreed with the actor defendant for him to appear in a production. He breached the contract. The company sought both loss of profits and for the expense incurred. The issue before the Court of Appeal was whether such . .
CitedOmak Maritime Ltd v Mamola Challenger Shipping Co Ltd ComC 4-Aug-2010
Lost Expenses as Damages for Contract Breach
The court was asked as to the basis in law of the principle allowing a contracting party to claim, as damages for breach, expenditure which has been wasted as a result of a breach. The charterer had been in breach of the contract but the owner had . .
CitedFSHC Group Holdings Ltd v Glas Trust Corporation Ltd CA 31-Jul-2019
Rectification – Chartbrook not followed
Opportunity for an appellate court to clarify the correct test to apply in deciding whether the written terms of a contract may be rectified because of a common mistake.
Held: The appeal failed. The judge was right to conclude that an . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Damages, Equity

Updated: 22 July 2022; Ref: scu.421538