Mehta v J Pereira Fernandes SA [2006] EWHC 813 (Ch) (07 April 2006)
The email, while capable of being a sufficient memorandum for Section 4, was not signed within the meaning of Section 4 of the Statute of Frauds because the automatic inclusion of an email address does not constitute a signature intended to authenticate the document.
- Citation
- [2006] EWHC 813 (Ch)
- Parties
- Appellant/defendant: Nilesh Mehta; Respondent/claimant: J Pereira Fernandes S.A.
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 07 April 2006
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Appeal From Summary Judgment
- Outcome
- Appeal allowed
- Legal Topics
- Guarantees, Statute of Frauds, Electronic Signatures, Summary Judgment
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Nilesh Mehta
Appellant/defendant
J Pereira Fernandes S.A.
Respondent/claimant
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Summary Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether an email can constitute a sufficient note or memorandum for the purposes of Section 4 of the Statute of Frauds
- 2 Whether the automatic inclusion of an email address constitutes a signature for the purposes of Section 4 of the Statute of Frauds
Ratio Decidendi
The email, while capable of being a sufficient memorandum for Section 4, was not signed within the meaning of Section 4 of the Statute of Frauds because the automatic inclusion of an email address does not constitute a signature intended to authenticate the document.
Court Disposition
Appeal allowed
Orders
- Summary judgment on the guarantee point dismissed
- Alternative claim for £5,000 to be dealt with by fresh application or at trial
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment