English v English & Anor

English v English & Anor

The claimant, by her conduct and instructions to her solicitors, ratified the forged loan and charge documents with full knowledge of the facts, making the transactions binding on her. The second defendant was not negligent as the advice given was sufficient and the claimant concurred in the process. The claimant's payment to the third defendant was voluntary, not under mistake, and no restitutionary remedy arises.

Parties
Claimant: Jean Sarah English; First Defendant: Colin English; First Defendant: Yvonne English; Second Defendant: Hodge Jones and Allen (a firm); Third Defendant: Swift Advances Plc
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
03 August 2010
Procedural Posture
Civil / Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Forgery, Ratification, Estoppel, Constructive Trust, Professional Negligence, Restitution
Contract Law Property Law Professional Negligence Forgery Ratification Estoppel Constructive Trust Restitution

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jean Sarah English

Claimant

Colin English

First Defendant

Yvonne English

First Defendant

Hodge Jones and Allen (a firm)

Second Defendant

Swift Advances Plc

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant's signature on loan and charge documents was forged and if so, whether she is bound by those documents
  2. 2 Whether the second defendant solicitors were professionally negligent in advising the claimant
  3. 3 Whether the claimant is entitled to recover monies paid to the third defendant on grounds of constructive trust or payment by mistake

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant, by her conduct and instructions to her solicitors, ratified the forged loan and charge documents with full knowledge of the facts, making the transactions binding on her. The second defendant was not negligent as the advice given was sufficient and the claimant concurred in the process. The claimant's payment to the third defendant was voluntary, not under mistake, and no restitutionary remedy arises.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed

Orders

  • Claim against the second defendant dismissed
  • Claim against the third defendant dismissed