A lessor sought to have the lease rectified against the tenant, saying the tenant had sufficient knowledge of the error in the lease to permit that remedy.
Held: The tenant had no such knowledge as would have brought the doctrine into play. In approving the dicta in Roberts with regard to rectification for unilateral mistake, the court added: ‘Whether there was in any particular case knowledge of the intention and mistake of the other party must be a question of fact to be decided upon the evidence. Basically it appears to us that it must be such as to involve the lessee in a degree of sharp practice.’
References: [1975] Ch 133, [1974] 2 All ER 656
Judges: Russell, Stamp and Lawton L.JJ
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
This case cites:
- Approved – A Roberts and Co Ltd v Leicestershire County Council ChD 1961 ([1961] Ch 555, [1961] 2 All ER 545)
The court considered the circumstances required for rectification of a contract after a unilateral mistake. Pennycuick J said: ‘a party is entitled to rectification of a contract upon proof that he believed a particular term to be included in the . .
This case is cited by:
- Cited – George Wimpey UK Ltd v VI Construction Ltd CA 3-Feb-2005 (, [2005] EWCA Civ 77, Times 16-Feb-05, [2005] BLR 135)
A land purchase contract had been rectified by the judge for unilateral mistake. A factor had been dropped from a formula for calculating the price.
Held: The judge’s conclusion that the circumstances existed to allow a rectification was . . - Cited – Thomas Bates and Sons Ltd v Wyndham’s Lingerie Ltd CA 21-Nov-1980 ([1981] 1 WLR 505, , [1980] EWCA Civ 3, [1981] 1 All ER 1077)
An application was made for rectification of a rent review clause in a lease. When executing the lease, the tenants’ officer, Mr Avon, noticed that the rent review clause in the lease drafted by the landlords was defective in not including a . .
These lists may be incomplete.
Last Update: 22 September 2020; Ref: scu.222560