Falcke v Gray

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
Judgment Date13 June 1859
Date13 June 1859
CourtHigh Court of Chancery

English Reports Citation: 62 E.R. 250

HIGH COURT OF CHANCERY

Falcke
and
Gray

S. C. 29 L. J. Ch. 28; 5 Jur. (N. S.) 645; 7 W. R. 535.

Specific Performance. Chattels.

[651] ealcke v. gkay. April 21, 27, June 13, 1859. [S. C. 29 L. J. Ch. 28 ';. 5 Jur, (N. S.) 645 ; 7 W. E. 535.] , ' . Specific Performance. , Chattels. The Court will enforce specific performance of a contract to purchase chattels, if damages- will not be an adequate compensation, But where the contract, although not actually fraudulent, was one in which the parties were not on an equal footing, the Plaintiff knowing, and the purchaser being ignorant, of the value of the thing sold, and the price appeared to be inadequate, the Court refused relief. In this case the bill was filed for a specific performance of a contract entered into between the Plaintiff, Mr. Falcke, and Mrs. Gray, one of the Defendants, by which Mrs. Gray had agreed that, at.the expiration of a six months' lease to the Plaintiff of her furnished house, he should have the option of purchasing two china jars at the price of 40. In 'January 1859 the Plaintiff, being desirous of finding a furnished house, applied to Mrs. Gray, who was willing to let hers, and on looking over it he observed the two jars, the subject of the suit. He had for twenty-five years carried on the business of a dealer in curiosities, china, &c., and was eminent in his trade, and was-well acquainted with the prices which articles of this kind would fetch. Shortly afterwards he had an interview with Mrs. Gray at her house ; and Mr. Brend, from the office of Boyle & Bryden, estate and house agents, who were Mrs. Gray's agents in the matter, attended to advise Mrs. Gray. A discussion arose as to the terms of letting, and ultimately a rent of seven guineas per week was agreed upon, with an option to the Plaintiff that he should at the end of the term be at liberty to purchase certain articles of furniture at a valuation, to be inserted in the agreement, including the two china jars, which were valued at 40. With regard to the valuation of these jars at 40, it [652] appeared from the evidence that Mr. Brend told Mrs. Gray that he did not know the value of the jars, but he should think they were worth 20 apiece ; and the agreement was drawn up, putting the value of 40 on the jars, and was signed by Mrs. Gray and the Plaintiff. On the 26th of January the Plaintiff went to the house while his agent was taking the inventory, and then the jars had been- removed ; and on the same day Mrs. Gray came to Mr. Falcke's house and informed him of the removal of the jars. During the interval between the 19th and the 26th of January Mrs. Gray, having began to doubt whether the price placed on the jars was fair, was advised that it would be as well to take the opinion of Mr. Watson, also a dealer in curiosities ; and, on the 26th, she accordingly went to Mr. Watson, and desired him to come in the evening to value the jars. This he did ; and on seeing the jars he was so much struck with their beauty, &c., that he offered Mrs. Gray his cheque for 200 for them at once. Mrs. Gray then asked Mr. Watson if he thought she would be doing anything wrong in so selling them, and he told her it was all right ; and she then took his cheque and Mr. Watson took away the jars. Mr. Watson was made a Defendant to the bill. The Plaintiff now insisted that he was entitled to a decree for specific performance 4DREWBYj653, tfALCKE tU GRAY 251 against Mrs.:Gray and; to delivery io^the jars: as against Mr.; Watson; and On that part of the case the-question was whether the transaction Was a bona fide one on; the part of Watsoa, or whether ;he knew of the contract between Mrs. Gray and the Plaintiff. The Defendant insisted that it was a contract for chattels, and could not be enforced. . v : : - , : [653] The evidence as to the actual value.of the vases was conflicting, but putting it at the lowest it greatly exc'eeded ,40. -. '''.: ' Mr. Baily and Mr. Waller, for the Plaintiff. On the question of the jurisdiction of the Court to order delivery of a chattel, the rule to be drawn from all the authorities is this: if you shew that the Plaintiff cannot have adequate relief by damages the Court will order the chattel to be delivered up. , Here we cannot obtain adequate relief in damages. There is conflicting evidence as to the value of the vases-utheir value is purely fanciful, depending on the imaginary value that one or a few individuals may chance to attach to them. They are extremely rare; they are not like a horse or any other thing that you may go and buy in the market. There may not be another similar pair of vases in England. [They cited on this point Pusey v. Pusey and Duke of Somerset v. GooJcson (referred to in White & Tudor's Leading Cases, pp. 529, 530); Pearne v. Lisle (Amb. 75); Fells v. Read (3 Ves. 70); Lloyd v. Louring (6 Ves. 777); Lady Arundell v. PUpps (10 Ves. 148); Earl of Maccltsfield v. Davis (3 Ves. & B. 16); New Brunswick and Canada Railway and Land Company v. Muggeridge (7 Week. Rep. 369); Claringbould v. Curtis (21 Law J. (N. S.) 541); Doloret^ v. Rothschild (1 Sim. & Stu. 598).] Then, as to the mode in which the agreement was entered into. Mrs. Gray and Falcke were at arm's length; she was protected by her own agent. Admit that Mr. Falcke knew the value of the vases, and that, she did not, that skill was his property...

To continue reading

Request your trial
10 cases
  • Westpac Banking Corporation v Lenthall
    • Australia
    • Full Federal Court (Australia)
    • 1 March 2019
    ...v Medtel Pty Limited [2002] FCA 957; 122 FCR 168 Davis v Insolvency and Trustee Service Australia [2010] FCAFC 141 Falcke v Gray (1850) 4 Drew 651; 62 ER 250 Femcare Ltd v Bright [2000] FCA 512; 100 FCR 331 Fisher v Fisher [1986] HCA 61; 161 CLR 438 Fostif Pty Ltd v Campbells Cash & Carry P......
  • ABFA Commodities Trading Ltd v Petraco Oil Company SA
    • United Kingdom
    • King's Bench Division (Commercial Court)
    • 30 January 2024
    ...it is possible to find older cases in which concurrent equitable relief has been denied in similar circumstances (e.g. Falcke v Gray (1859) 4 Drew 651, in which Kindersley V-C denied the purchaser of two Chinese vases specific performance because they had knowingly paid far below their real......
  • Hilary Bowman of Richland Park v Eudenia Arrindell also known as Shirley Eudenia Arrindell of Arnos Vale
    • St Vincent
    • High Court (Saint Vincent)
    • 2 May 2019
    ...2016. 2 At paragraph 9 of his Pre-trial memorandum filed on 10 th January 2018. 3 In her Pre-trial memorandum filed on 16 th March 2018. 4 62 E.R. 250. 5 Chitty on Contracts; para. 6 Chitty on Contracts, 24 th Ed. para. 2. 7 Filed on 9 th March 2016. 8 Filed on 9 th March 2016. 9 [1970] 3 ......
  • Guerin v Heffernan
    • Ireland
    • Supreme Court (Irish Free State)
    • 12 December 1925
    ...and FitzGibbon JJ. (1) 29 Ch. Div. 661. (2) [1900] 1 Q. B. 694. (3) [1907] 1 Ch. 238. (4) [1915] A. C. 386. (5) L. R. 6 H. L. 414. (1) 4 Drew. 651. (2) [1902] 2 Ch. (3) 35 Ch. Div. 390. (4) 27 L. R. Ir. 4. (5) L. R. 10 Eq. 281. ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results
5 books & journal articles
  • Table of cases
    • Canada
    • Irwin Books The Law of Equitable Remedies - Third edition
    • 18 November 2023
    ...REMEDIES 740 Fairmont Hotels Inc v AG Canada, 2014 ONSC 7302 ....................................... 695 Falcke v Gray (1859), 4 Dr 651, 62 ER 250, 33 LTOS 297 (VC) ................. 534, 542 Family Delicatessen Ltd v London (City), [1998] OJ No 2760 (Ont Ct of J Gen Div) ........................
  • Table of Cases
    • Canada
    • Irwin Books Archive The Law of Equitable Remedies. Second Edition
    • 18 June 2013
    ...146, 147 Fahrmann v. Eagle and Horvath, 2005 BCSC 1596 ........................................... 448 Falcke v. Gray (1859), 4 Dr. 651, 62 E.R. 250, 33 L.T.O.S. 297 (V.C.) .......................................................................... 383, 391 Farley v. Skinner, [2002] 2 A.C. 7......
  • Specific Performance: Chattels, Shares, and Payment of Money
    • Canada
    • Irwin Books The Law of Equitable Remedies - Third edition
    • 18 November 2023
    ...c 71. 2 See, for example, Fells v Read (1796), 3 Ves Jr 70, 30 ER 899 (Ch) [ Fells ] (silver altarpiece); Falcke v Gray (1859), 4 Dr 651, 62 ER 250 (VC) [ Falcke ] (old jars). 3 See Pusey v Pusey (1684), 1 Vern 273, 23 ER 465 (Ch) [ Pusey ]. 534 Speciic Performance: Chattels, Shares, and Pa......
  • Specific Performance: Chattels, Shares, and Payment of Money
    • Canada
    • Irwin Books Archive The Law of Equitable Remedies. Second Edition
    • 18 June 2013
    ...for example, Fells v. Read (1796), 3 Ves. Jr. 70, 30 E.R. 899 (Ch.) [ Fells ] (silver altarpiece); and Falcke v. Gray (1859), 4 Dr. 651, 62 E.R. 250 (V.C.) [ Falcke ] (old jars). 383 The Law of equiTabLe Remedies 384 value to the buyer, such as a family heirloom. 3 These contracts supported......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT