Sharplin v Henderson
| Sharplin v Henderson | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Court | Court of Appeal of New Zealand |
| Full case name | Sharplin v Henderson |
| Decided | 28 June 1988 |
| Citation(s) | [1990] 2 NZLR 134 |
| Court membership | |
| Judge(s) sitting | Cooke P, McMullin J Hardie Boys |
Sharplin v Henderson [1990] 2 NZLR 134 is a cited case in New Zealand regarding the requirement under section 7(4)(b) of the Contractual Remedies Act 1970 that a breach of a contract must be "substantial" for a contract to be cancelled.[1]
Background[edit]
Sharplin purchased a Tauranga orchard from Henderson.
After the sale, it was discovered that the real estate agent had misrepresented that 900 trees belonged to the property, representing 25% of the property.
Sharplin sued for misrepresentation.
Held[edit]
The misrepresentation was substantial, and relief was granted.
References[edit]
- ^ Chetwin, Maree; Graw, Stephen; Tiong, Raymond (2006). An introduction to the Law of Contract in New Zealand (4th ed.). Thomson Brookers. pp. 276–277, 283. ISBN 0-86472-555-8.