WebThe two defendants then retired. As part of their retirement package, they received large bonuses of £30,000 and £20,000 each. It was subsequently discovered that the defendants had been involved in a cartel in order to steal information and make money. Lever Bros attempted to claim that the contract was void for mistake of fact. WebShogun Finance Ltd v Hudson [2003] UKHL 62 The parties were caught in a scam for a hire-purchase agreement over a car, where the scammer had pretended to be someone with good credit. The court held that the mistaken identity had voided the contract, especially because in a hire-purchase agreement, unlike in a regular sale, title of the property ...

Shogun Finance Ltd v Hudson [2003] UKHL 62

WebMisrepresentation, exclusion clause. Howard Marine and Dredging Co Ltd v A Ogden & Sons (Excavations) Ltd [1978] QB 574 is an English contract law case, concerning misrepresentation. It explains the test of "reasonable grounds for belief" under the Misrepresentation Act 1967 s 2 (1), and raises the issue of the reasonableness test under … WebShogun Finance Ltd v. Hudson [2003] UKHL 62 (19 November 2003) http://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/markup.cgi?doc=/uk/cases/UKHL/2003/62.html End of … fox follower

Shogan Finance v Hudson - e-lawresources.co.uk

http://www.e-lawresources.co.uk/Shogan-Finance-v-Hudson.php WebLord Hobhouse - Shogun Finance Ltd V Hudson [2003] UKHL 62 'the parol evidence rule is fundamental to the mercantile law of this country' and 'the certainty of the contract depends of it'. 'the rule is one of the great strengths of English commercial law and is one of the main reasons for the international success of English law in preference ... WebThe House of Lords, in Shogun Finance Limited v. Hudson [2003] UKHL 62, [2003] 3 W.L.R. 1371, affirmed the decision of the Court of Appeal (reported at [2002] Q.B. 84, and noted in this Journal ([2002] C.L.J. 272 at 273-276)). As the first significant decision of the House on mistake in over seven decades, Shogun Finance is blacktown arts