Category: rectification

Konica Minolta Business Solutions (UK) Ltd v Applegate – WLR Daily

Posted January 11th, 2013 in law reports, pensions, rectification, trusts by tracey

Konica Minolta Business Solutions (UK) Ltd v Applegate: [2012] EWHC 3741 (Ch);   [2013] WLR (D)  9

“When applying uniform accrual to ‘so much of any benefit’ by virtue of section 74(3) of the Pension Schemes Act 1993 one was being directed not merely to what one might call the top slice, the benefit which actually accrued at the higher rate, but that element of a benefit package which was the subject of the higher rate. In section 74(3) the ‘benefit’ referred to was the composite of the various benefits which made up long service benefit and if the exception applied it did with regard to the entirety of such a component.”

WLR Daily, 21st December 2012

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Cherry Tree Investments Ltd v Landmain Ltd – WLR Daily

Posted June 6th, 2012 in appeals, contracts, land registration, law reports, rectification by sally

Cherry Tree Investments Ltd v Landmain Ltd [2012] EWCA Civ 736; [2012] WLR (D) 170

“Where it was alleged that a registered charge included an extended power of sale which was included in a facility agreement but was not referred to in the charge, the correct approach was to bring a properly pleaded and proved claim for rectification of the charge, not to seek to apply a ‘corrective construction’ of the charge by reference to extrinsic material.”

WLR Daily, 31st May 2012

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Clause does not bar court from correcting contract, rules High Court – OUT-LAW.com

Posted July 16th, 2010 in contracts, news, rectification by sally

“A mistake in a contract between two companies can be corrected by a court despite the contract containing a clause stating that only the contents of the contract should govern the disputed deal.”

Full story

OUT-LAW.com, 16th July 2010

Source: www.out-law.com

Baxter v Mannion – WLR Daily

Posted March 22nd, 2010 in adverse possession, land registration, law reports, rectification, squatting by sally

Baxter v Mannion [2010] EWHC 573 (Ch); [2010] WLR (D) 82

“There was no good reason to confine the jurisdiction of the registrar under para 5(a) of Sch 4 to the Land Registration Act 2002 to the correction of procedural mistakes. If any statutory condition which was a prerequisite for registration was shown not to have been satisfied, there was a mistake in the register which the registrar had power to correct.”

WLR Daily, 19th March 2010

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

Chartbrook Ltd and another v Persimmon Homes Ltd and another – WLR Daily

Posted July 2nd, 2009 in contracts, evidence, interpretation, law reports, rectification by sally

Chartbrook Ltd and another v Persimmon Homes Ltd and another [2009] UKHL 38; [2009] WLR (D) 223

“The admission of pre-contractual negotiations as an aid to the construction of a contract would create uncertainty of outcome in disputes over interpretation and would add to the cost of advice and litigation. The law of contract was designed to enforce promises with a high degree of predictability and if conventional meanings and syntax were to be displaced by inferences drawn from pre-contractual negotiations, the less predictable the outcome was likely to be. The availability of the remedies of rectification and estoppel by convention were safeguards which would in most cases prevent any injustice caused by the exclusion of that evidence.”

WLR Daily, 1st July 2009

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

Chartbrook Ltd and Another v Persimmon Homes Ltd and Another – Times Law Reports

Posted July 2nd, 2009 in contracts, evidence, interpretation, law reports, rectification by sally

Chartbrook Ltd and Another v Persimmon Homes Ltd and Another

House of Lords

“There were no grounds for the House of Lords to depart from the long standing rule that excluded evidence of what was said or done during the course of negotiating a contract for the purpose of drawing inferences about what the contract meant.”

The Times, 2nd July 2009

Source: www.timesonline.co.uk