A surety had been released on the strength of a fraud practised by the debtor.
Held: The creditor’s rights against the surety were restored. Not only is a person who has committed the fraud precluded from deriving any benefit under it, but an innocent person is so likewise, unless there has been some consideration moving from himself.
Lord Campbell LC said: ‘I consider it to be an established principle that a person cannot avail himself of what has been obtained by the fraud of another, unless he not only is innocent of the fraud, but has given some valuable consideration.’
Judges:
Lord Campbell LC
Citations:
(1859) 4 De G and J 429, (1859) Johns 155, [1859] EngR 773
Cited by:
Cited – Soutzos v Asombang and Others ChD 21-Jun-2011
The claimant had obtained a freezing order against the defendants. His claim having been dismissed, the court now considered if and what damages should be paid under the cross-undertaking he had given.
Held: Setting out and applying the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Torts – Other, Contract
Updated: 04 May 2022; Ref: scu.441143
