Bhatt v Bhatt & Ors [2009] EWHC 734 (Ch) (03 April 2009)

Bhatt v Bhatt & Ors [2009] EWHC 734 (Ch) (03 April 2009)

Mrs Bhatt executed the documents under a fundamental mistake as to their effect, not merely their consequences, and would not have done so had she known the true position. The lack of proper advice and explanation, combined with her limited English, meant her intentions were not carried into effect. Equity requires the transaction to be set aside.

Citation
[2009] EWHC 734 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Mrs Shantaben Durgashanker Bhatt; Defendant: Miss Hasmita Durgashanker Bhatt; Defendant: Miss Mrudula Durgashanker Bhatt; Defendant: Mr Hiteshchandra (otherwise Hitesh) Bhatt; Defendant: Mrs Niranjana Purohit; Defendant: Mr Mukundrai (otherwise Mukund) Durgashanker Bhatt; Defendant: Mrs Josna (otherwise Jyotsna) Vyas; Defendant: Mr Arvindrai (otherwise Arvind) Durgashanker Bhatt; Defendant: Mr Ashokkumar (otherwise Ashok) Durgashanker Bhatt
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
03 April 2009
Procedural Posture
Chancery Division Claim for Equitable Relief / Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Claim allowed; documents and transaction set aside for mistake, subject to Revenue's right to contest.
Legal Topics
Rectification of Register, Rescission for Mistake, Inheritance Tax Planning, Mistake in Voluntary Transactions, Trust Deeds, Notice of Severance
Equity Trusts and Estates Property Law Rectification of Register Rescission for Mistake Inheritance Tax Planning Mistake in Voluntary Transactions Trust Deeds +1 more

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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mrs Shantaben Durgashanker Bhatt

Claimant

Miss Hasmita Durgashanker Bhatt

Defendant

Miss Mrudula Durgashanker Bhatt

Defendant

Mr Hiteshchandra (otherwise Hitesh) Bhatt

Defendant

Mrs Niranjana Purohit

Defendant

Mr Mukundrai (otherwise Mukund) Durgashanker Bhatt

Defendant

Mrs Josna (otherwise Jyotsna) Vyas

Defendant

Mr Arvindrai (otherwise Arvind) Durgashanker Bhatt

Defendant

Mr Ashokkumar (otherwise Ashok) Durgashanker Bhatt

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Chancery Division Claim for Equitable Relief / Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether documents executed by Mrs Bhatt (trust deed, deed of variation, notice of severance, transfer) should be set aside for mistake
  2. 2 Whether the court should rectify the registered title to the property
  3. 3 Whether Mrs Bhatt acted under a sufficiently serious mistake as to the effect of the documents

Ratio Decidendi

Mrs Bhatt executed the documents under a fundamental mistake as to their effect, not merely their consequences, and would not have done so had she known the true position. The lack of proper advice and explanation, combined with her limited English, meant her intentions were not carried into effect. Equity requires the transaction to be set aside.

Court Disposition

Claim allowed; documents and transaction set aside for mistake, subject to Revenue's right to contest.

Orders

  • Documents (trust deed, deed of variation, notice of severance, transfer) and transaction set aside
  • Register to be rectified accordingly