Dimmock v Hallett [1866]

Facts

  • In selling some farm land, the defendant told the claimant that all of the farms were under tenancy, which was factually true
  • The defendant failed to mention that all of the tenants had given notice to vacate their land

Issue

  • Could the contract of sale be rescinded?

Decision

  • Yes

Reasoning

  • Misleading to omit such vital information where the reason for the question was clear
RELATED CASE  Pau On v Lau Yiu Long [1980]

Posted in Contract Law Revision Notes.

This page was last updated on 27th April 2014

© 2020 Webstroke Law - Terms and Privacy Policy