Judgement for the case Fry v Lane
Table Of Contents
Plaintiffs were selling their interest in a property to Defendant and were being advised by Defendant’s solicitor.
Defendant then sold the property for vastly greater sum than he paid, and the court ordered that the release of Plaintiffs’ interest and that they be given the proportion of the proceed from the sale in proportion to their interests.
Kay J
-
Plaintiffs were “poor and ignorant”, had “no independent advice” and the sale was at an “undervalue”. He bases on his judgment on:
The vulnerability of Plaintiffs and
The substantive unfairness of the contract.
He says that although normally deals cant be set aside “merely on the grounds of undervalue”, they can where there is an “undervalue so gross as to suggest fraud”.
In such cases (weakness of Plaintiff and usury, extortion, taking advantage etc. by Defendant) there is a presumption of fraud which Defendant can overturn by showing the transaction to be “fair, just and reasonable” as in Aylesford.
RELATED CASES
For Further Study on Fry v Lane
Equity notes fully updated for recent exams at Oxford and Cambrid...
Need instant answers? Our AI exam tutor is here to help.
Ask questions 🙋 Get answers 📔 It's simple 👁️👄👁️
Our AI is educated by the highest scoring students across all subjects and schools. Join hundreds of your peers today.
Get StartedSimilar Cases
Related Product Samples
These product samples contain the same concepts we cover in this case.
| Trusts and Equity | Trust Remedies Including Tracing Knowing Receipt Trust Dutiies And Powers And Equitable Damages Notes (60 pages) |
From the AuthorContract law notes fully updated for recent exams at ...
