Doyle v Olby (Ironmongers) Ltd [1969] EWCA Civ 2 (31 January 1969)

Doyle v Olby (Ironmongers) Ltd [1969] EWCA Civ 2 (31 January 1969)

The proper measure of damages for fraud is all losses directly flowing from the fraudulent inducement, not limited to the cost of making good the representation or reduction in goodwill. The plaintiff was tricked into buying a business he would not otherwise have bought, and is entitled to be put, as far as money can do, in the position he would have been in had he not entered into the contract at all. The Court assessed damages at £5,500 on this basis.

Citation
[1969] EWCA Civ 2
Parties
Plaintiff Appellant: Herbert Leonard Doyle; Defendant Respondent: Olby (Ironmongers) Limited; Defendant Respondent: Cecil Augustus Olby; Defendant Respondent: Leslie Morton Olby; Defendant Respondent: A. Olby & Son Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
31 January 1969
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Appeal From Judgment of Mr. Justice Swanwick, High Court, Without a Jury
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Fraud, Deceit, Damages, Misrepresentation, Conspiracy
Tort Contract Fraud Deceit Damages Misrepresentation Conspiracy

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Herbert Leonard Doyle

Plaintiff Appellant

Olby (Ironmongers) Limited

Defendant Respondent

Cecil Augustus Olby

Defendant Respondent

Leslie Morton Olby

Defendant Respondent

A. Olby & Son Limited

Defendant Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Appeal From Judgment of Mr. Justice Swanwick, High Court, Without a Jury

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What is the proper measure of damages for fraud (deceit) as opposed to breach of contract?
  2. 2 Is the plaintiff entitled to a higher award of damages than assessed at first instance?

Ratio Decidendi

The proper measure of damages for fraud is all losses directly flowing from the fraudulent inducement, not limited to the cost of making good the representation or reduction in goodwill. The plaintiff was tricked into buying a business he would not otherwise have bought, and is entitled to be put, as far as money can do, in the position he would have been in had he not entered into the contract at all. The Court assessed damages at £5,500 on this basis.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Judgment for the plaintiff for £5,500 instead of £1,500
  • Plaintiff awarded all costs