Day & Anor v Day

Day & Anor v Day

The appeal was allowed because the evidence established that Mrs Day never intended to confer a beneficial interest in the property to the respondent, and the conveyance failed to reflect her true intention. The authority or intention of the attorney executing the conveyance was irrelevant for rectification in a voluntary settlement; only the settlor's subjective intention mattered.

Parties
Appellant: James Harry Day; Appellant: Michael Harry Day; Respondent: Terence Anthony Day
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
27 March 2013
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Central London County Court to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Rectification of Instruments, Voluntary Settlement, Mistake in Conveyance, Power of Attorney, Beneficial Ownership
Equity Property Law Trusts and Estates Rectification of Instruments Voluntary Settlement Mistake in Conveyance Power of Attorney Beneficial Ownership

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 24 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

James Harry Day

Appellant

Michael Harry Day

Appellant

Terence Anthony Day

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Central London County Court to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a conveyance executed by an attorney under a general power of attorney can be rectified to reflect the true intention of the settlor in a voluntary settlement
  2. 2 Whether the subjective intention of the settlor (Mrs Day) is determinative for rectification in a voluntary settlement
  3. 3 Whether the authority of the attorney or the intention of the attorney is relevant for rectification

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was allowed because the evidence established that Mrs Day never intended to confer a beneficial interest in the property to the respondent, and the conveyance failed to reflect her true intention. The authority or intention of the attorney executing the conveyance was irrelevant for rectification in a voluntary settlement; only the settlor's subjective intention mattered.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Order for rectification of the conveyance to reflect that Mrs Day and the respondent held the beneficial interest in the property on trust for Mrs Day absolutely.