Gustav v Macfield [2008, New Zealand]

Facts

  • The seller of some land had cancer, which the purchaser knew about

Issue

  • Could the contract be set aside for unconscionable conduct

Decision

  • No, claim failed

Reasoning

  • Although there was the presence of cancer, the seller was perfectly capable of conducting their affairs at the time of the transaction
RELATED CASE  Curtis v Chemical Cleaning & Dyeing Co [1951]

Posted in Contract Law Revision Notes.

This page was last updated on 20th January 2014

© 2020 Webstroke Law - Terms and Privacy Policy