Shalson v Russo (Lionel Smith, 31 Jul 2003)

Of course it's just a tree. What does it look like ?

RDG online
Restitution Discussion Group Archives

Restitution
front page

What's new?

Another tree!

Archive front page

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2007

2006

2008

2009

Another tree!

<== Previous message Back to index Next message ==>

Sender:	Lionel Smith
Date:	Thu, 31 Jul 2003 15:31:52 -0400
Re:	Shalson v Russo

There is a tracing/claiming overdose to be had from Shalson v Russo, [2003] EWHC 1637 (ChD), on Lexis, decided by Rimer J earlier this month. Like any good tracing case, it involves a yacht and a faked painting.

The judgment touches some interesting issues, including legal vs equitable tracing, whether a plaintiff has any interest in property transferred pursuant to a contract induced by fraud before rescission, how to rescind, Quistclose trust (Twinsectra trust?), backwards tracing, lowest intermediate balance in the context of multiple claimants ('rolling charge' theory). All issues are resolved on the charming theory that nothing outside the law reports is relevant, except Shakespeare.

LDS

<== Previous message Back to index Next message ==>

" These messages are all © their authors. Nothing in them constitutes legal advice, to anyone, on any topic, least of all Restitution. Be warned that very few propositions in Restitution command universal agreement, and certainly not this one. Have a nice day! "

»
»
»
»
»

For editorial policy, see here.
For the unedited archive, see here.
The archive editor is Steve Hedley.