Tutorial 12 (Anton Piller Order, Rescission, Rectification)

The document discusses equitable remedies including: [1] Anton Piller Orders - which allow a plaintiff's solicitor to enter a defendant's premises to search for and seize documents or materials. It explains the solicitor's duties in executing such an order. [2] Rectification and rescission - which are equitable remedies used to correct injustices. Rectification aims to make a written instrument reflect the true intentions of the parties, while rescission aims to cancel an agreement where one party was mistaken or misled. The document outlines cases that define the purposes and applications of these remedies.

Uploaded by

Vishithira Manoharan

We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.

Available Formats

Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

0% found this document useful (0 votes)

156 views2 pages

Tutorial 12 (Anton Piller Order, Rescission, Rectification)

Uploaded by

Vishithira Manoharan

We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.

Available Formats

Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

You are on page 1/ 2

Tutorial 12 (Anton Piller Order, Rescission, Rectification)

1. “Only Plaintiff’s solicitor is allowed to enter into the defendant’s premise.”

Explain the application of Anton Piller Order and the way to execute the same.

• Duty of plaintiff’s solicitor in serving and executing an APO as an officer of the court
• Case:
o Columbia Picture Industries [1987] Ch. 38 at 76-77
o Judicial Requirement (wan azlan’s book at 308 -309)
• Case: Universal Thermosensors Ltd v Hibben [1992] 1 WLR

2. The purpose of the equitable remedies of rectification and rescission are to set injustices
right. Explain how courts achieve this.

• Intro: Maxim: Equity will not suffer a wrong to be without a remedy.

• Definition of rectification.
• Purpose of rectification.
Oh Hiam v Tham Kong

When instruments may be rectified

 Lim Hong Shin v Leong Fong Yew – the mistake must be common to all parties
and the evidence must be very clear with regards to the real intentions of the parties.
 Riverlate Properties Ltd v Paul; Thomas Bates & Sons Ltd v Wyndham’s
(Lingerie) Ltd – where mistake is unilateral due to fraud, rectification is an
appropriate remedy. Otherwise, where the defendant is not aware of the mistake,
rectification is not allowed.

Does not truly express their intention

 Zakaria Daud v Siti Hussin – the instrument must fail to record the true intention
of the parties.
 Yuson Bien v Bankers Trust Co Ltd – burden of proving intention is on the party
asking for rectification.
o Clearly proved
 Crane v Hegeman-Harris Co – the burden on the party asking for rectification is a
heavy one. The working assumption is that the instrument does indeed represent the
intentions of the parties. The burden of proof on the plaintiff is beyond reasonable
doubt.

o Without prejudice to rights acquired by third persons in good faith and for value
 Lyme Valley Squash Club Ltd v Newcastle under Lyme Borough Council

• Definition of rescission.
• Purpose of rescission
• Court may require party rescinding to do equity. S.37 On adjudging the rescission
of a contract, the court may require the party to whom the relief is granted to make
any compensation to the other which justice may require
• When cancellation may be ordered. S.38(1) Any person against whom a written
instrument is void or voidable, who has reasonable apprehension that such
instrument, if left outstanding, may cause him serious injury, may sue to have it
adjudged void or voidable, and the court may, in its discretion, so adjudge it and order
it to be delivered up and cancelled.