Caws & Ors v Boyce & Ors [2007] EWHC 691 (Ch) (30 March 2007)

Caws & Ors v Boyce & Ors [2007] EWHC 691 (Ch) (30 March 2007)

The claimants failed to prove on the balance of probabilities that the transfer of the Plot to Mr Boyce was procured by duress, undue influence, or fraudulent misrepresentation. The evidence showed Miss Caws acted voluntarily and was engaged in property dealings and mortgage frauds at the relevant time. Mr Boyce was...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2007] EWHC 691 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Jacqueline Caws; Claimant: Shirley Caws; Claimant: David Duff; Defendant: Barry Boyce; Defendant: Nicola Hoare; Defendant: B M Samuel Group Ltd; Defendant: Gary MacNeill
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
30 March 2007
Procedural Posture
Chancery Division Civil Claim / Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Duress, Undue Influence, Fraudulent Misrepresentation, Resulting Trusts, Mortgage Fraud
Property Law Equity and Trusts Civil Procedure Duress Undue Influence Fraudulent Misrepresentation Resulting Trusts Mortgage Fraud

Source-derived case record

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 9
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jacqueline Caws

Claimant

Shirley Caws

Claimant

David Duff

Claimant

Barry Boyce

Defendant

Nicola Hoare

Defendant

B M Samuel Group Ltd

Defendant

Gary MacNeill

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Chancery Division Civil Claim / Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the transfer of the Plot by Miss Caws to Mr Boyce was procured by duress or undue influence
  2. 2 Whether Mr Boyce held the Plot or its proceeds on trust for Miss Caws
  3. 3 Whether fraudulent misrepresentation occurred

Ratio Decidendi

The claimants failed to prove on the balance of probabilities that the transfer of the Plot to Mr Boyce was procured by duress, undue influence, or fraudulent misrepresentation. The evidence showed Miss Caws acted voluntarily and was engaged in property dealings and mortgage frauds at the relevant time. Mr Boyce was not found to hold the Plot or its proceeds on trust for Miss Caws. The claim is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed

Orders

  • The claim is dismissed in its entirety.
  • No order as to costs due to the claimants' status as litigants in person.