The parties were in dispute. The now respondent threatened winding up. The appellant had someone in his company send an email requesting an adjournment and apparently giving a personal guarantee to a certain amount. The application was adjourned, but the applicant then did not honour the guarantee, saying that it was not enforceable, the email not being signed. The respondent said that the addition of the email address was sufficient signature.
Held: The appeal succeeded. The email address had been added by the appellant’s service provider as part of the header of the email, and was not present when sent and was not a signature: ‘a party can sign a document for the purposes of Section 4 by using his full name or his last name prefixed by some or all of his initials or using his initials, and possibly by using a pseudonym or a combination of letters and numbers (as can happen for example with a Lloyds slip scratch), providing always that whatever was used was inserted into the document in order to give, and with the intention of giving, authenticity to it. Its inclusion must have been intended as a signature for these purposes.’
Pelling QC J
Times 16-May-2006, [2006] EWHC 813 (Ch), [2006] 1 WLR 1543
Bailii
Statute of Frauds 1677 v
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Lever v Koffler 1901
An offer was made in writing by the Defendant to sell two parcels of real property on alternative bases, where one of the alternatives was accepted both orally and by letter by the Plaintiff. He suggested two bases upon which the 1677 Act operated . .
Cited – Hussey v Horne-Payne HL 1879
An exchange of letters which together constituted a binding agreement would satisfy the requirements of Section 4 as it applied to contracts for the sale of land.
Lord Selborne said: ‘The observation has often been made, that a contract . .
Cited – Evans v Hoare 1892
A defendant sought to deny liability under a document relying on the 1677 Statute. the relevant document had been drawn up by a duly authorised agent of the Defendants. The document was a letter from the Plaintiff and the words ‘Messrs Hoare, Marr . .
Cited – Smith v Neale 1857
The defendant wrote to the plaintiff requesting the assignment of a patent to him to hold as trustee for an institution who would pay him a share of the profits on exploitation of the patent, and if the profits fell below a figure, the patent would . .
Cited – Reuss v Picksley 1866
A written proposal was purportedly accepted orally. The requirements of the 1677 Statute were satisfied where a signed written offer containing the requisite terms was accepted orally by the other party.
Willes J said: ‘The only question is, . .
Cited – Parker v Clark 1960
A written offer was accepted in writing by a letter that became lost. Although it was recognised that oral evidence of the written acceptance might provide an answer, the case was argued on the basis that the written offer was a sufficient . .
Cited – Winn v Bull ChD 19-Nov-1877
By an agreement in writing, the defendant agreed with the plaintiff to take a lease of a house. The other details were included, but the agreement was ‘subject to the preparation and approval of a formal contract’. The plaintiff sought specific . .
Cited – Elpis Maritime Company Limited v Marti Chartering Company Limited (The Maria D) HL 1991
Brokers (Marti) were to guarantee a charter on the Gencon form, which contained, as one of the additional typed clauses a provision (Clause 24) in the following terms: ‘Demurrage guaranteed and payable directly by charterers to owners. However Marti . .
Cited – In re Hoyle CA 1893
ALSmith LJ discussed the 1677 Act: ‘The object of the Statute was to prevent fraud and perjury by taking away the right to sue on certain agreements if only established by verbal evidence . . The object of the statute being merely to exclude parol . .
Cited – Caton v Caton HL 1867
A document began by referring to ‘the under mentioned parties’ and then referred to the parties in question by name in relation to various promises. Neither party signed the document and the question was whether the document constituted a sufficient . .
Distinguished – Godwin v Francis 1870
The court was asked as to the effect of a note or memorandum in the form of instructions to a telegraph company signed by the party to be charged on whose behalf the telegram concerned was sent.
Held: Bovill CJ said: ‘the mere telegram written . .
Distinguished – McBlain v Cross 1871
The court considered the stautus under the 1677 statute in the case of a telegram which stated that it came from the sender and did so with his express authority. . .
Cited by:
Cited – Orton v Collins and others ChD 23-Apr-2007
The court considered how a Part 36 offer could be treated as accepted when it involved an agreement to transfer land, because the offer and its acceptance would not operate under the 1989 Act.
Held: The agreement was enforceable. The Civil . .
Cited – Golden Ocean Group Ltd v Salgaocar Mining Industries Pvt Ltd and Another ComC 21-Jan-2011
The defendants sought to set aside orders allowing the claimants to serve proceedings alleging repudiation of a charterparty in turn allowing a claim against the defendants under a guarantee. The defendant said the guarantee was unenforceable under . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Contract
Updated: 19 January 2022; Ref: scu.240177