References: (1849) Exch 591, [1849] EngR 1242, (1849) 4 Exch 591, (1849) 154 ER 1350
Links: Commonlii
Coram: Alderson B
A devise of ‘all my leasehold farm-house, homestead, lands, and tenements at Headington, containing about 170 acres, held under Magdalen College, Oxford, and now in the occupation of Thomas Burrows’ was construed as excluding two parcels of land not occupied by Thomas Burrows at Headington, the words relating to the acreage being rejected as a false description. The court considered the maxim ‘that if there be an adequate and sufficient description, with convenient certainty of what was meant to pass, a subsequent erroneous addition will not vitiate it. The characteristic of cases within the rule is that the description, so far as it is false, applies to no subject at all; and so far as it is true, applies to one only.’
This case is cited by:
- Cited – Rogers and Rogers -v- Freeguard and Freeguard CA (Times 22-Oct-98, Gazette 25-Nov-98, Bailii, [1998] EWCA Civ 1572, [1999] 1 WLR 375)
The parties had drawn up ands executed an option agreement. When a court considered an option to purchase ‘land known as . .’, it was able to consider extrinsic evidence to establish just what was included where the identification in the deed was . .