Stephens & Anor v Cannon & Anor

Stephens & Anor v Cannon & Anor

The master was not entitled to resort to the burden of proof in assessing the value of the hypothetical property without demonstrating that he had striven to resolve the evidential conflict and explaining why he could not reasonably do so; the damages award and costs order must be set aside and the issue remitted for rehearing.

Parties
Appellant: Stephen John Stephens; Appellant: Sheila Dilys Stephens; Respondent: Charles Cannon; Respondent: Sheila Cannon
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
14 March 2005
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From High Court, Chancery Division
Outcome
Appeal allowed; cross-appeal rendered academic.
Legal Topics
Damages Assessment, Burden of Proof, Overage Provisions, Specific Performance, Expert Evidence

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

Parties

Stephen John Stephens

Appellant

Sheila Dilys Stephens

Appellant

Charles Cannon

Respondent

Sheila Cannon

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From High Court, Chancery Division

  1. 1 Proper construction of overage condition and supplemental agreement
  2. 2 Appropriate assessment of damages based on hypothetical property value
  3. 3 Judicial duty regarding burden of proof in valuation disputes

Ratio Decidendi

The master was not entitled to resort to the burden of proof in assessing the value of the hypothetical property without demonstrating that he had striven to resolve the evidential conflict and explaining why he could not reasonably do so; the damages award and costs order must be set aside and the issue remitted for rehearing.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; cross-appeal rendered academic.

Orders

  • Damages award set aside.
  • Costs order set aside.