Timmins v Moreland Street Property Co Ltd: CA 1958

The Court considered the effect of a note or memorandum evidencing the sale of a property where it was described as ‘6,8 and 41, Boundary Street, Shoreditch (freehold).’ It was sought to connect the signature on a purchaser’s deposit cheque with an unsigned memorandum that stated the terms of the contract.
Held: Jenkins LJ said: ‘A description of this kind is to be taken as extending to the whole of the vendor’s interest in the property, so that the memorandum on the face of it records an agreement for the sale and purchase of the while of such interest. Moreover, unless the contrary appears, such interest is to be taken as comprising the fee simple in possession free from incumbrances, and the purchaser will be entitled to reject any less interest than that.’
When asked as to whether a cheque and a receipt could be read together he said: ‘it is still indispensably necessary, in order to justify the reading of documents together for this purpose, that there should be a document signed by the party to be charged, which, while not containing in itself all the necessary ingredients of the required memorandum, does contain some reference, express or implied, to some other document or transaction. Where any such reference can be spelt out of a document so signed, then parol evidence may be given to identify the other document referred to, or, as the case may be, to explain the other transaction, and to identify any document relating to it. If by this process a document is brought to light which contains in writing all the terms of the bargain so far as not contained in the document signed by the party to be charged, then the two documents can be read together so as to constitute a sufficient memorandum.’


Jenkins LJ


[1958] Ch 110, [1957] 3 All ER 265


Law of Property Act 1925 40


England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedBarclays Bank Plc v Weeks Legg and Dean (a Firm); Barclays Bank Plc v Lougher and Others; Barclays Bank Plc v Hopkin John and Co CA 21-May-1998
The defendant solicitors had each acted for banks in completing charges over property. They had given the standard agreed form of undertaking to secure a good and marketable title, and the banks now alleged that they were in breach because . .
CitedOrton v Collins and others ChD 23-Apr-2007
The court considered how a Part 36 offer could be treated as accepted when it involved an agreement to transfer land, because the offer and its acceptance would not operate under the 1989 Act.
Held: The agreement was enforceable. The Civil . .
ApprovedElias v George Sahely and Co (Barbados) Ltd PC 1982
(Barbados) The parties entered into an oral agreement for the sale of land to the plaintiff. The plaintiff’s solicitor then wrote to the defendant’s solicitor confirming the oral agreement and setting out its terms. He enclosed a cheque for 10 . .
DistinguishedGolden Ocean Group Ltd v Salgaocar Mining Industries Pvt Ltd and Another ComC 21-Jan-2011
The defendants sought to set aside orders allowing the claimants to serve proceedings alleging repudiation of a charterparty in turn allowing a claim against the defendants under a guarantee. The defendant said the guarantee was unenforceable under . .
CitedGolden Ocean Group Ltd v Salgaocar Mining Industries Pvt Ltd and Another CA 9-Mar-2012
The court was asked ‘whether a contract of guarantee is enforceable where contained not in a single document signed by the guarantor but in a series of documents duly authenticated by the signature of the guarantor. It is common in commercial . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land, Contract

Updated: 13 May 2022; Ref: scu.229216