Proprietary relief without rescission

The decision of the Court of Appeal in Halley v. The Law Society [2003] EWCA Civ 97 has the potential to muddy the waters of the law of rescission. It is a fundamental principle that a fraudulent misrepresentation renders a contract voidable at the instance of the representee (Bristol and West Build...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: TANG, Hang Wu
Format: text
Language:English
Published: Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University 2004
Subjects:
Online Access:https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/sol_research/2390
https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/context/sol_research/article/4348/viewcontent/4509067__1_.pdf
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Institution: Singapore Management University
Language: English
id sg-smu-ink.sol_research-4348
record_format dspace
spelling sg-smu-ink.sol_research-43482017-11-23T02:25:50Z Proprietary relief without rescission TANG, Hang Wu The decision of the Court of Appeal in Halley v. The Law Society [2003] EWCA Civ 97 has the potential to muddy the waters of the law of rescission. It is a fundamental principle that a fraudulent misrepresentation renders a contract voidable at the instance of the representee (Bristol and West Building Society v. Mothew [1998] Ch. 1, 22). Modern authorities suggest that the representee does not have any proprietary interest in property transferred by him pursuant to the contract before rescission (see Bristol and West Building Society v. Mothew [1998] Ch. 1, 22-23; Twinsectra Ltd. v. Yardley [1999] Lloyd's Rep. Bank. 438, 46) 2004-03-01T08:00:00Z text application/pdf https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/sol_research/2390 https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/context/sol_research/article/4348/viewcontent/4509067__1_.pdf http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ Research Collection Yong Pung How School Of Law eng Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University Fraud Contracts Attorneys Business structures Misrepresentation Proprietary interest Bank accounts Bank fraud Investment companies Banking and Finance Law Bankruptcy Law
institution Singapore Management University
building SMU Libraries
continent Asia
country Singapore
Singapore
content_provider SMU Libraries
collection InK@SMU
language English
topic Fraud
Contracts
Attorneys
Business structures
Misrepresentation
Proprietary interest
Bank accounts
Bank fraud
Investment companies
Banking and Finance Law
Bankruptcy Law
spellingShingle Fraud
Contracts
Attorneys
Business structures
Misrepresentation
Proprietary interest
Bank accounts
Bank fraud
Investment companies
Banking and Finance Law
Bankruptcy Law
TANG, Hang Wu
Proprietary relief without rescission
description The decision of the Court of Appeal in Halley v. The Law Society [2003] EWCA Civ 97 has the potential to muddy the waters of the law of rescission. It is a fundamental principle that a fraudulent misrepresentation renders a contract voidable at the instance of the representee (Bristol and West Building Society v. Mothew [1998] Ch. 1, 22). Modern authorities suggest that the representee does not have any proprietary interest in property transferred by him pursuant to the contract before rescission (see Bristol and West Building Society v. Mothew [1998] Ch. 1, 22-23; Twinsectra Ltd. v. Yardley [1999] Lloyd's Rep. Bank. 438, 46)
format text
author TANG, Hang Wu
author_facet TANG, Hang Wu
author_sort TANG, Hang Wu
title Proprietary relief without rescission
title_short Proprietary relief without rescission
title_full Proprietary relief without rescission
title_fullStr Proprietary relief without rescission
title_full_unstemmed Proprietary relief without rescission
title_sort proprietary relief without rescission
publisher Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University
publishDate 2004
url https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/sol_research/2390
https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/context/sol_research/article/4348/viewcontent/4509067__1_.pdf
_version_ 1772829451952848896