What is it about?
Contends that courts should be wary of concluding that recission permits a claim to substitute property.
Featured Image
Why is it important?
It is doubtable whether rescission should even give rise to property claims in the first place, and a claim for substitute property creates a number of difficulties.
Read the Original
This page is a summary of:
Rescission and substitute property:
Bainbridge v Bainbridge
[2016] EWHC 898 (Ch)
, Trusts & Trustees, August 2016, Oxford University Press (OUP),
DOI: 10.1093/tandt/ttw165.
You can read the full text:
Contributors
The following have contributed to this page
