Restitution
front page

What's new?

Archive front page

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2007

2006

2008

2009

Some muscular restitution theory before Nigel Teare QC in the Commercial Court in Halpern v Halpern [2006] EWHC 1642 (Comm). A complex Jewish inheritance dispute in a Beth Din is compromised: apart from distribution of the goodies, one term of the compromise is destruction of all documents relating to the dispute. One party then says the compromise has been obtained by duress, & seeks to undo it. Other party argues, we've destroyed our documents and hence you can't give back what you got. First party ripostes: you don't need restitutio in a duress case: and a preliminary issue is ordered on the point, Yes, you do need restitutio, says the judge. Duress is like deceit, and even the wicked have the right to demand back what they gave.

Presumably now someone has to sort out whether substantial restitutio is possible despite the fact that the documents can't be revived.

Happy days,

Andrew

--
Andrew Tettenborn MA LLB
Bracton Professor of Law
University of Exeter, England

Tel: 01392-263189 / +44-392-263189 (outside UK)
Cellphone: 07870-130528 / +44-7870-130528 (outside UK)
Fax: 01392-263196 / +44-392-263196 (outside UK)

Snailmail: School of Law,
University of Exeter,
Amory Building,
Rennes Drive,
Exeter EX4 4RJ
England

Exeter Law School homepage: http://www.law.ex.ac.uk
My homepage: http://www.law.ex.ac.uk/staff/tettenborn.shtml

LAWYER, n. One skilled in circumvention of the law (Ambrose Bierce, 1906).