Robb v James: 28 Feb 2014

(New Zealand Court of Appeal) The Court contrasted ‘the state of some uncertainty as to the requisites for rectification in English law’ (referring to the Daventry case) with the ‘relatively settled’ position in New Zealand where ‘Tipping J’s 1987 formulation still applies’.

Citations:

[2014] NZCA 42

Links:

NZLii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

ApprovedWestland Savings Bank v Hancock 1987
Tipping J set out the requirements for rectification for common mistake: ‘(1) That, whether there is an antecedent agreement or not, the parties formed and continued to hold a single corresponding intention on the point in question.
(2) That . .

Cited by:

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.

Contract, Equity

Updated: 18 July 2022; Ref: scu.640350