Trustees In the Charity of Sir John Morden v Mayrick; Graham v Mayrick: CA 12 Jan 2007

The claimant had owned tracts of land in London for very many years, but the title deeds had been lost. The defendant had purchased a part from a company who had in turn purchased from the claimants, but the parties disputed an adjacent strip of land. Under a compromise agreement, the claimants had agreed to transfer a further strip to the defendant in return for other land. The defendant refused to accept the title offered. The claimants sought specific performance of the agreement, supported by a Land Registry statement that they would accept the claimant’s title. The defendant now appealed. The appeal failed. The facts he now sought to set up against the claimants’ title had been known to him at the time of the compromise. The defendant had misrepresented the content of the letter which he said was itself misrepresentation. The defendant had no real prospect of defending the claim for specific peformance.
[2007] EWCA Civ 4
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal fromGraham and others v Mayrick ChD 23-Mar-2006
The claimants sought specific performance of a compromise agreement with the defendant after a dispute over a strip of land. The defendant appealed a finding that the claimants had shown satisfactory title.
Held: ‘It has long been established . .
Leave to AppealGraham and Others v Mayrick CA 1-Jun-2006
Application for leave to appeal – granted. . .
CitedSmirk v Lyndale Developments Ltd ChD 1975
The court considered the doctrine that a tenant acquiring title to land by adverse possession, did so on behalf of hs landlord.
Held: The cases demonstrated that ‘the law . . has got into something of a tangle’, but the doctrine, at least as . .
CitedSmirk v Lyndale Developments Ltd CA 2-Jan-1975
Judgment upheld . .
CitedThe Royal Brompton Hospital National Health Service Trust v Hammond and Others (No 5) CA 11-Apr-2001
When looking at an application to strike out a claim, the normal ‘balance of probabilities’ standard of proof did not apply. It was the court’s task to assess whether, even if supplemented by evidence at trial, the claimant’s claim was bound to fail . .

Cited by:
CitedWestvilla Properties Ltd v Dow Properties Ltd ChD 15-Jan-2010
The owner sought specific performance of its contract to sell land to the defendant. The land was subject to a proposed lease which the defendant had concluded was uncertain and unattractive, and claimed to have rescinded the contract.
Held: . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 26 January 2021; Ref: scu.247685