Heywood v BDC. Properties Ltd (No 2)

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
JudgeLORD JUSTICE HARMAN,LORD JUSTICE SALMON
Judgment Date04 May 1964
Judgment citation (vLex)[1964] EWCA Civ J0504-1
CourtCourt of Appeal
Date04 May 1964

[1964] EWCA Civ J0504-1

In The Supreme Court of Judicature

Court of Appeal

Before:

Lord Justice Harman and

Lord Justice Salmon.

Between:
Sidney George Heywood and Claude Henry George Heywood
Appellants
and
B. D. C. Properties Limited
Respondents

MR J. P. BROOKES, (instructed by Messrs. Arnold & Co., Agents for Messrs. Dunn & Baker of Exeter) appeared on behalf of the Appellants.

MR P. A. W. MERRITON. (instructed by Messrs. Beech & Beech) appeared on behalf of the Respondents.

LORD JUSTICE HARMAN
1

This is a case of Greek against Greek. The Plaintiffs negotiated with the Defendants for the sale to them of certain sites for development near Exeter. The negotiations were conducted, as is often the way, subject to contract. Just before the contracts were exchanged the Plaintiffs had a better offer and, as they were legally entitled to do in the circumstances, called off the deal. The Defendants had in the meanwhile, when things were getting bitter between the parties, done what is often done by way of bringing pressure on the other side, that is, they registered estate contracts under section 6 (4) of the Land Charges Act, 1926, against the two Plaintiffs. That had the effect of holding up the Plaintiffs from completing their new and more profitable bargain.

2

The plaintiffs started this action for the negative relief of a declaration that there was no contract. They also asked for damages, but whether they seriously meant to press that claim, I do not know. The other relief for which they asked was the vacation of the estate contracts on the ground that there was in the correspondence relied on as justifying the registration nothing which could be possibly construed by the court as a contract. They moved the court in the action by way of interlocutory Motion to vacate the estate contracts. That matter has already been before the Court of Appeal. Mr. Justice Pennycuick in April, 1963, came to the conclusion that there was no shadow of contract on the correspondence relied on and made an Order vacating the estate contracts, and that was supported in this court on the 14th June of last year.

3

But the Defendants had not fired their last shot. Two or three days before the Court of Appeal made their decision they applied for and succeeded in obtaining the Registration of what was called a lis pendens against the land, which, of coarse, Is a notice to all the world that there is a lawsuit pending regarding that land and would, therefore, I should have thought, frightened off any purchaser.

4

The Plaintiffs, thus frustrated, reacted after some delay. On the 7th November they took out the summons now before us to vacate the lis pendens. Why, having proceeded by Motion in the first case they should have resorted to the statutory jurisdiction of a summons in the second passes ay comprehension. Mr. Justice Tomlin, a great master of Chancery procedure, used to say that anything you could do by summons you could do by Motion....

To continue reading

Request your trial
24 cases
  • Taylor v Taylor
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 1 Julio 1986
    ... ... B.D.C. Properties Limited , reported in 1964 1 Weekly Law Reports at page 971 , and also in 1964 2 All England Law ... ...
  • Graham Ferguson Lacey Claimant v Abraham Zion Sea Shells Reefs Ltd Defendants [ECSC]
    • Antigua and Barbuda
    • High Court (Antigua)
    • 17 Agosto 2006
    ...he relied on the following cases namelyHalf Moon Bay Ltd v Crown Eagle Hotels Ltd (2002) UKPC 24; Heywood v BDC Properties Ltd (No. 2) [1964] 1 WLR 267; Regan and Blackburn Ltd v Rogers [1985] 1 WLR 870; Haslemere Estates Ltd v Baker [1982] 1 WLR 1109 and Federated Homes Ltd v Mill Lodge Lt......
  • Re A Company (No 007466 of 2003); Company Number 1389920 v Registrar of Companies
    • United Kingdom
    • Chancery Division
    • 19 Enero 2004
    ...of rectification. In support of his submission Mr McDonnell referred to Re Calmex Ltd [1989] BCLC 299, [1989] 1 All ER 485, Heywood v BDC Properties Ltd (No 2) [1964] 2 All ER 702, [1964] 1 WLR 971, Calgary & Edmonton Land Co Ltd v Dobinson [1974] 1 All ER 484, [1974] Ch 102, Norman v......
  • Nugent v Nugent
    • United Kingdom
    • Chancery Division
    • 20 Diciembre 2013
    ...jurisdiction of the court and the circumstances in which that jurisdiction was available, I have considered the decisions in Heywood v BDC Properties Ltd [1963] 1 WLR 975, Heywood v BDC Properties Ltd (No. 2) [1964] 1 WLR 971, Taylor v Taylor [1968] 1 WLR 378, The Rawlplug Co Ltd v Kamvale ......
  • 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