Plaintiff owning land – Defendant developers claiming plaintiff had granted options to buy – Plaintiff claiming no options granted – Whether signature on options forged – Whether options to be set aside in equity – Declaration that options forged
The plaintiff was the freehold owner of two properties in Tring, Hertfordshire. The first, Dundale, consisted of 12 acres of land which included a lake. The second, Morningside, which was nearby, consisted of two acres with a cottage. The plaintiff had lived in the cottage for 80 years. It had no hot water, no television, no refrigerator, no gas and no telephone. The plaintiff’s only mode of transport was a bicycle which he always took with him whenever he left his cottage, although he never rode it but merely wheeled it along. His principle topic of interest was flora and fauna, and he had allowed his land to become overgrown to let nature take its course without human interference.
The fifth defendant, S, was in the property business. The sixth defendant was S’s son. The fourth defendant was Hintonhurst Ltd, with which S had a close connection. The third defendant, Amalgamated Builders Ltd, was a building company and the first defendant was an Isle of Man company on whose behalf J had signed any relevant documents. The defendants claimed that they had been granted 11 options, which had been signed by the plaintiff, to purchase both Dundale and Morningside. The plaintiff, by his next friend in the litigation, his nephew, challenged the validity of the options, and claimed that the plaintiff had not signed any of them. The first to fifth defendants effectively withdrew from the proceedings before the hearing. Both J and S chose not to give evidence. The sixth defendant claimed that by virtue of the 11th option, which had been granted to him for a payment of £10, he had the right to purchase Dundale for £135,000 within seven years from June 1 1988. The 11th option was purportedly signed by the plaintiff with a confirmatory letter also purported to have been signed by him.
Held Judgment was given for the plaintiff.
1. On the evidence it was apparent that the first to 10th options had been forged. Although there were factors which militated in favour of the 11th option being genuine, S had obtained forged signatures on some of the other options, and therefore similar fact evidence could be taken into account. Accordingly, the purported signature on the 11th option would also be considered to be a forgery.
2. In any event, the signature on the 11th option would have been set aside under the court’s equitable jurisdiction. It had been purportedly granted for a consideration which was substantially less than its value. The plaintiff was an unsophisticated, unworldly, eccentric recluse aged over 76, and he had had no independent advice. He was reluctant to sell his land and wanted to leave it to his family. In those circumstances the signature on the 11th option was to be set aside on grounds of unconscionability: see Alec Lobb (Garages) Ltd v Total Oil Great Britain Ltd [1983] 1 All ER 944.
Michael Beckman QC and Lynne Counsell (instructed by Howard Kennedy) appeared for the plaintiff; Wayne Clark (instructed by Clive Travers, of Bedford) appeared for the sixth defendant; the first to fifth defendants did not appear and were not represented.