Derry and Others v Peek
| Jurisdiction | UK Non-devolved |
| Judgment Date | 01 July 1889 |
| Judgment citation (vLex) | [1889] UKHL J0701-1 |
| Court | House of Lords |
| Date | 01 July 1889 |
[1889] UKHL J0701-1
House of Lords
After hearing Counsel, as well on Thursday the 28th and Friday the 29th days of March last as Friday the 5th, Tuesday the 9th, and Thursday the 11th days of April last, upon the Petition and Appeal of William Derry, of Houndscombe, Plymouth, in the County of Devon; Joseph Colen Wakefield, of 25, Holland Villas Road, Kensington, in the County of Middlesex; Michael Miller Moore, of No. 6, Lombard Street, in the City of London; John Pethick, of Norley House, Plymouth, aforesaid; and Samuel John Wilde, of No. 10, Serjeants' Inn, Fleet Street, in the City of London, aforesaid, praying, That the matter of the Order set forth in the Schedule thereto, namely, an Order of Her Majesty's Court of Appeal, of the 19th of November 1887, so far as regards the words, "This Court doth order that the said Judgment, dated the 24th March 1887, be reversed:
And this Court doth declare that the Plaintiff was induced by the statement in the prospectus of the Defendants mentioned in the statement of claim to make the purchase of the 400 shares hereinafter mentioned, and that the Defendants are liable to make good to the Plaintiff the loss sustained by him by reason of his taking the 400 shares in the Plymouth, Devonport, and District Tramway Company, and that this loss is to be the difference between the sum of £. 4,000 paid by him for such shares and the real value of such shares immediately after the 17th February 1883, when they were allotted to him:
And it is ordered that the following inquiry be made:�
An inquiry what was the real value of the said 400 shares in the said Plymouth, Devonport, and District Tramway Company, immediately after the 17th February 1883, when such shares were allotted to the Plaintiff, and what is the difference between £. 4,000, the price paid by the Plaintiff for such shares, and the value thereof immediately after the said 17th February 1883:
And it is ordered that the Defendants, William Derry, Joseph Colen Wakefield, Michael Miller Moore, John Pethick, and Samuel John Wilde, pay to the Plaintiff, Sir Henry William Peek, Baronet, the amount of such difference within one month after the date of the Chief Clerk's certificate:"
And also as far as regards the words, "And it is ordered that the Defendants, William Derry, Joseph Colen Wakefield, Michael Miller Moore, John Pethick, and Samuel John Wilde do pay to the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Delany v Keogh
... ... C. 925. Cullen v. Thomson's TrusteesUNK 4 Macq. H. L. 424. Derry v. Peek 14 A. C. 337. Derry v. Peek 14 A. C. 377. Dimmock v ... in the particuÂlars of sale which were read out by the defendant to the plainÂtiff and others at the auction :—" The above property is held under lease for a term of sixty-one years at ... ...
-
Nike Real Estate Ltd v De Bruyne
...E. 796; 120 E.R. 706, applied. (4) Dawson”s Ltd. v. Bonnin, [1922] 2 A.C. 413; (1922), 91 L.J.P.C. 210, applied. (5) Derry v. PeekELR(1889), 14 App. Cas. 337; 58 L.J. Ch. 864, distinguished. (6) Downs v. Chappell, [1997] 1 W.L.R. 426; [1996] 3 All E.R. 344, applied. (7) Hill v. GrayENR(1816......
-
Ennia General Insurance Company Ltd Appellant v J. Astaphan & Company (1970) Ltd Respondent [ECSC]
...if there is an honest belief in the accuracy of the claim and dishonest means are used in presenting it, it is fraudulent. Counsel cited DERRY v. PEEK (1889) 14 A.C. 337 and he also quoted the following pasage from the judgment of Viscount Sumner in LEK v. MATTHEWS (1927) 29 LL.R. 141, whic......
- Teknik Cekap Sdn Bhd v Villa Genting Development Sdn Bhd
-
Liability For Misleading Or Untrue Statements: ACL Netherlands BV v Lynch
...they must hold it, to give rise to liability. He drew considerable support from a fraudulent misstatement decision, Derry v Peek (1889) 14 App. Cas. 337, to identify the three specific principles. First, actual knowledge of the falsity of each pleaded statement is necessary in order to rend......
-
How To Navigate The Autonomy Judgment: Guidance For Corporate Issuers Defending Section 90A / Schedule 10A FSMA Shareholder Claims
...deliberately left out). Recklessness. In the context of s.90A/Sch 10A FSMA, recklessness bears the meaning laid down in Derry v Peek (1889) 14 App. Cas. 337, i.e. not caring the truth of the statement, such as to lack an honest belief in its truth. Dishonesty Even on the civil burden of pro......
-
'Dishonesty And Fraud Exclusion In PI Policy: Court Affirms Wayne Tank Principle And As To Defence Costs Entitlements': Mccarthy -v- St Paul International Insurance Co Ltd [2007] FCAFC 2
...Keifel J rejected this argument. The person is guilty of deceit if they know or believe what they say to be false: Derry v Peek (1889) 14 App Cas 337. Whether a statement is dishonest is to be assessed by reference to standards of ordinary honest persons: McCann v Switzerland Insurance Aust......
-
Insurance Act 2015: The Issues The Market Is Grappling With
...proof. In CP3 we proposed that dishonest breaches should be referred to as "deliberate or reckless"." 2 Following Derry v Peek (1889) LR 14 App Cas 337 where Lord Herschell defined fraudulent misrepresentation as a statement which is made either: (i) knowing it to be false, (ii) without bel......
-
AN ACCOUNT OF ACCOUNTS
...2 Ch D 1 at 8 (compensatory relief awarded for secret commission); and, post-Nocton, McKenzie v McDonald[1925] VLR 134. 54(1889) LR 14 App Cas 337. 55Nocton v Lord Ashburton[1914] AC 932 at 932–940. 56Bristol & West Building Society v Mothew[1998] Ch 1 at 17, per Millett LJ; Richard Nolan, ......
-
Table of Cases
...All ER 621 172 Derbyshire County Council v Times Newspapers [1993] AC 534, [1993] 1 WLR 449, [1993] 1 All ER 1011, HL 56 Derry v Peek (1889) 14 App Cas 337, 54 JP 148, 58 LJ Ch 864, HL 210 Di Palma v Victoria Square Property Co Ltd [1986] Ch 150, [1985] 3 WLR 207, [1985] 2 All ER 676, CA 17......
-
Table of Cases
...Portfolios LLC v Orient-Express Hotels Ltd [2010] Bda LR 32, Sup Ct of Bermuda 8.37–8.38, 8.41, 8.83–8.84, 8.92, 9.15 Derry v Peek (1889) 14 App Cas 337, [1886–90] All ER Rep 1, 58 LJ Ch 864, HL 9.45 Desert Sun Loan Corpn v Hill [1996] 2 All ER 847, [1996] CLC 1132, (1996) 5 Bank LR 98, CA ......
-
VITIATING FACTORS IN CONTRACT LAW — THE INTERACTION OF THEORY AND PRACTICE
...277—278. 70 See generally David Allen, Misrepresentation (1988). 71 The classic case being that of the House of Lords in Deny v Peek(1889) 14 App Cas 337, and the classic definition of fraud being that of Lord Herschell in the selfsame case: ibid at 374. 72 On issues relating to the measure......