178:) that he expected that two pieces of garden formed part of the lot, when they were in fact held by a railway company and not the vendor. The primary judge found that at the auction for the lot, plans were made available that showed that the gardens were not part of the lot, but that the defendant did not inspect the plans.
204:
James LJ held that the defence to specific performance for mistake could not generally be sustained where the vendor did nothing to mislead the purchaser and the mistake arose because of the purchaser's lack of reasonable care (here, the failure to inspect the plans). However, James LJ left it open
107:. The case established that if a person enters a contract under a mistake that was not induced by the other party to the contract, specific performance may be awarded against the person if no hardship amounting to clear injustice would be inflicted on the person by holding him/her to the contract.
247:
For the most part the cases where a defendant has escaped on the ground of a mistake not contributed to by the plaintiff, have been cases where a hardship amounting to injustice would have been inflicted upon him by holding him to his bargain, and it was unreasonable to hold him to
220:
Brett LJ agreed to uphold the decree for specific performance, suggesting that a purchaser could not be relieved from specific performance for a mistake that was not of vital importance to the contract and arose from the purchaser's own negligence.
224:
Cotton LJ also agreed to uphold the decree for specific performance, holding that a purchaser could not escape specific performance for a mistake that "he had no right to make". Cotton LJ argued (in
228:) (James LJ agreeing) that where specific performance is not awarded because of a mistake, the court should proceed to award damages to the plaintiff in lieu of specific performance.
584:
217:) that where specific performance is not awarded because of a mistake, the court should proceed to award damages to the plaintiff in lieu of specific performance.
256:
has relied on the case for the proposition that "a party to a contract cannot... escape specific performance by simply swearing that he did not understand it".
213:
James LJ found that the defendant's mistaken purchase of the lot did not fall within this category of unjust hardship. James LJ agreed with Cotton LJ (in
181:
The primary judge made a decree for specific performance to compel the defendant's purchase of the land. The defendant appealed to the Court of Appeal.
138:, in the same parish, No. 454 and 455 on the said tithe map, and containing by admeasurement twenty perches, more or less, now in the occupation of Mrs.
366:
189:
The three presiding judges of the Court of Appeal unanimously dismissed the appeal, upholding the decree for specific performance. The judges were
464:
408:
114:
has described its proposition as "a party to a contract cannot... escape specific performance by simply swearing that he did not understand it".
209:...a hardship amounting to injustice would have been inflicted upon by holding him to his bargain, and it was unreasonable to hold him to it.
29:
579:
436:
285:
194:
64:
422:
326:
190:
104:
60:
314:
594:
589:
476:
529:
546:
253:
111:
511:"Contract - General Principles - Remedies - Specific Performance and Injunctions - Specific Performance".
278:
252:
The case has also been regularly cited by appellate courts as an authority on specific performance. The
340:
492:
239:
is a widely cited case on the availability of specific performance. Brett LJ's judgment is cited in
198:
96:
92:
159:, and abuts on other premises of the vendors, on the canal, and on lands now or late of the Rev.
100:
271:
175:
352:
534:
538:
134:, together with the messuage, saddler's shop, and premises adjoining thereto, situate at
454:
450:
440:
398:
302:
412:
372:
356:
330:
174:
The defendant did not perform the contract of sale. He deposed to the primary judge (
130:
All that well-accustomed inn, with the brewhouse, outbuildings, and premises known as
573:
382:
225:
214:
426:
394:
123:
168:
68:
487:
263:
126:(James) advertised a lot of land for sale in the following terms:
267:
171:(Tamplin) signed a contract to purchase the lot for £750.
80:
Contract, sale of land, mistake, specific performance
524:
522:
74:
56:
51:
43:
35:
25:
20:
540:
205:for specific performance to be excused where:
515:. Thomson Reuters. 31 August 2006. pp. .
279:
8:
286:
272:
264:
17:
585:Court of Appeal (England and Wales) cases
368:Entores Ltd v Miles Far East Corporation
503:
465:British Steel Co v Cleveland Bridge Ltd
409:Butler Machine Tool Ltd v Ex-Cell-O Ltd
7:
95:case concerning the availability of
559:"Refusal of specific performance".
437:Blackpool Aero Club v Blackpool BC
14:
151:This lot is situate close to the
423:Gibson v Manchester City Council
327:Carlill v Carbolic Smokeball Co
1:
563:. Thomson Reuters. pp. .
315:Brogden v Metropolitan Rly Co
191:Sir William Milbourne James
611:
318:(1876-77) LR 2 App Cas 666
243:for the proposition that:
580:English contract case law
561:Voumard: The Sale of Land
473:
461:
447:
433:
419:
405:
391:
379:
363:
349:
337:
323:
311:
299:
241:Voumard: The Sale of Land
91:(1880) 15 Ch D 215 is an
79:
530:Goldsbrough Mort v Quinn
477:Agreement in English law
254:High Court of Australia
112:High Court of Australia
47:(1880) 15 Ch D 215 (CA)
250:
211:
165:
157:Severn and Wye Railway
148:
535:[1910] HCA 20
513:The Laws of Australia
341:Chapelton v Barry UDC
245:
207:
149:
128:
545: (19 May 2010),
493:Specific performance
97:specific performance
93:English contract law
595:1879 in British law
306:(1871) LR 6 QB 597
294:Cases on agreement
101:breach of contract
483:
482:
84:
83:
602:
590:1879 in case law
565:
564:
556:
550:
542:
526:
517:
516:
508:
369:
353:Errington v Wood
288:
281:
274:
265:
199:Sir Henry Cotton
155:station, on the
52:Court membership
18:
610:
609:
605:
604:
603:
601:
600:
599:
570:
569:
568:
558:
557:
553:
527:
520:
510:
509:
505:
501:
484:
479:
469:
457:
443:
429:
415:
401:
387:
375:
367:
359:
345:
333:
319:
307:
295:
292:
262:
237:Tamplin v James
234:
197:(Brett LJ) and
187:
120:
88:Tamplin v James
30:Court of Appeal
21:Tamplin v James
12:
11:
5:
608:
606:
598:
597:
592:
587:
582:
572:
571:
567:
566:
551:
518:
502:
500:
497:
496:
495:
490:
481:
480:
474:
471:
470:
462:
459:
458:
451:Barry v Davies
448:
445:
444:
434:
431:
430:
420:
417:
416:
406:
403:
402:
392:
389:
388:
380:
377:
376:
364:
361:
360:
350:
347:
346:
338:
335:
334:
324:
321:
320:
312:
309:
308:
303:Smith v Hughes
300:
297:
296:
293:
291:
290:
283:
276:
268:
261:
258:
233:
230:
195:Viscount Esher
186:
183:
161:W. H. Bathurst
119:
116:
82:
81:
77:
76:
72:
71:
58:
57:Judges sitting
54:
53:
49:
48:
45:
41:
40:
37:
33:
32:
27:
23:
22:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
607:
596:
593:
591:
588:
586:
583:
581:
578:
577:
575:
562:
555:
552:
548:
544:
536:
532:
531:
525:
523:
519:
514:
507:
504:
498:
494:
491:
489:
486:
485:
478:
472:
467:
466:
460:
456:
453:
452:
446:
442:
439:
438:
432:
428:
425:
424:
418:
414:
411:
410:
404:
400:
397:
396:
390:
385:
384:
383:Fisher v Bell
378:
374:
371:
370:
362:
358:
355:
354:
348:
343:
342:
336:
332:
329:
328:
322:
317:
316:
310:
305:
304:
298:
289:
284:
282:
277:
275:
270:
269:
266:
259:
257:
255:
249:
244:
242:
238:
231:
229:
227:
222:
218:
216:
210:
206:
202:
201:(Cotton LJ).
200:
196:
192:
184:
182:
179:
177:
172:
170:
164:
162:
158:
154:
147:
145:
141:
137:
133:
127:
125:
117:
115:
113:
108:
106:
102:
98:
94:
90:
89:
78:
73:
70:
66:
62:
59:
55:
50:
46:
42:
38:
34:
31:
28:
24:
19:
16:
560:
554:
549:(Australia).
528:
512:
506:
468:1 All ER 504
463:
455:EWCA Civ 235
449:
435:
421:
407:
393:
381:
365:
351:
339:
325:
313:
301:
251:
246:
240:
236:
235:
232:Significance
223:
219:
212:
208:
203:
193:(James LJ),
188:
180:
176:Baggallay LJ
173:
166:
160:
156:
152:
150:
143:
139:
135:
131:
129:
121:
109:
87:
86:
85:
39:13 July 1879
15:
441:EWCA Civ 13
399:EWCA Civ 15
395:The Brimnes
153:Lydney Town
103:induced by
574:Categories
547:High Court
539:(1910) 10
413:EWCA Civ 9
373:EWCA Civ 3
357:EWCA Civ 2
331:EWCA Civ 1
144:S. Merrick
124:plaintiffs
169:defendant
69:Cotton LJ
488:Contract
386:1 QB 394
344:1 KB 532
260:See also
185:Judgment
142:and Mr.
132:The Ship
75:Keywords
65:Brett LJ
61:James LJ
44:Citation
140:Knowles
136:Newerne
105:mistake
36:Decided
427:UKHL 6
226:obiter
215:obiter
99:for a
533:
499:Notes
118:Facts
26:Court
475:see
167:The
122:The
110:The
67:and
543:674
541:CLR
248:it.
576::
537:,
521:^
63:,
287:e
280:t
273:v
163:.
146:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.