000			01879cad a22002295a 4500
001			L143460
008			080513e20080319xxk f v 000 0 eng d
035			_a(Sirsi) u143460
041	0		_aeng
245	0	0	_aOun v Ahmad _h[electronic resource]
260			_c2008
520			_a[2008] EWHC 545 (Ch), 19 March 2008. Considers whether legal rectification is available where parties have executed a document and then discovered a mistake as to the legal consequences of the document. The appellant (O) had agreed to sell the lease of a mixed use property to the respondent (X). An agreement was drawn up, but following additional concerns raised by X a second contract was created relating to a further sum to be paid on completion for the trading stock. There was disagreement regarding the completion of the contracts. O applied for a unilateral notice of title and X objected. O appealed against the adjudicator's decision that no common mistake was represented and that rectification was unavailable. "Held": For there to be a binding contract of sale, the written agreement would have to represent the full intentions of both parties. If this was not the case then prima facie there was no binding contract. An express agreement to omit terms meant that rectification to the contract was not available, as the contract as drawn up was not in error. Therefore O was not in possession of a binding agreement and rectification was unavailable. Appeal dismissed.
590			_aKA
650	2	4	_aOUN V AHMAD
650	2	4	_aLAW OF PROPERTY (MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS) ACT 1989 S2
650	2	4	_aWILLS V GIBBS
650	2	4	_aALLNUTT V WILDING
651		4	_aEngland and Wales _y1543-
690			_aPROPERTY-ACQUISITION AND DISPOSAL OF PROPERTY
856	4	0	_uhttps://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Ch/2008/545.html _zView the judgment free of charge at www.bailii.org...
942			_n0
999			_c80190 _d80190