Rice & Ors v Jamieson & Anor [2001] ScotCS 128 (29 May 2001)

Rice & Ors v Jamieson & Anor [2001] ScotCS 128 (29 May 2001)

The Dispositions did not reflect the common intention of the parties in both sales; rectification is justified to correct the mistake and limit the conveyed property to the house and walled garden.

Citation
[2001] ScotCS 128
Parties
Petitioners: Professor Charles Duncan Rice and Others; Respondents: Andrew Jamieson and Another
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
29 May 2001
Procedural Posture
Petition for Rectification / Proof After Procedure Roll Hearing
Outcome
Petition granted
Legal Topics
Rectification of Dispositions, Common Intention, Mistake in Conveyancing
Property Law Conveyancing Rectification of Dispositions Common Intention Mistake in Conveyancing

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 1 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Professor Charles Duncan Rice and Others

Petitioners

Andrew Jamieson and Another

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Petition for Rectification / Proof After Procedure Roll Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Dispositions reflected the common intention of the parties to sell only the house and walled garden
  2. 2 Whether rectification is justified under Section 8 of the Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions)(Scotland) Act 1985

Ratio Decidendi

The Dispositions did not reflect the common intention of the parties in both sales; rectification is justified to correct the mistake and limit the conveyed property to the house and walled garden.

Court Disposition

Petition granted

Orders

  • Rectification of the two Dispositions to reflect sale of only the house and walled garden, with reference to plan 6/19 of process