Site icon swarb.co.uk

Targett and Targett v Ferguson and Diver: 1996

The common intention of the parties to a contract is to be construed objectively. The objective test to be satisfied is, what would the reasonable layman think he was buying?

Judges:

Sir John Balcombe

Citations:

(1996) 72 P and CR 114

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Dictum ApprovedSpall v Owen 1981
There was a description of a property as ‘the property known as plot number 1’.
Held: Peter Gibson LJ said that such a description cried aloud for evidence of the surrounding circumstances. . .

Cited by:

CitedRogers and Another v Freeguard and Another CA 19-Oct-1998
The parties had drawn up and 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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land

Updated: 25 November 2022; Ref: scu.197728

Exit mobile version