Sir Harry Peachy v Duke of Somerset: 1720

Lord Macclesfield said: ‘The true ground of relief against penalties is from the original intent of the case, where the penalty is designed only to secure money, and the court gives him all that he expected or desired: but it is quite otherwise in the present case. These penalties or forfeitures were never intended by way of compensation, for there can be none.’

Judges:

Lord Macclesfield

Citations:

(1720) 1 Strange 447

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedCavendish Square Holding Bv v Talal El Makdessi; ParkingEye Ltd v Beavis SC 4-Nov-2015
The court reconsidered the law relating to penalty clauses in contracts. The first appeal, Cavendish Square Holding BV v Talal El Makdessi, raised the issue in relation to two clauses in a substantial commercial contract. The second appeal, . .
See AlsoSir Harry Peachy v Duke of Somerset 16-Jun-1721
A court of equity will not assist a copyholder against a forfeiture, which is found such at law, unless in cases where compensation can be made. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land, Equity

Updated: 08 May 2022; Ref: scu.572400