Shogun Finance Ltd v Hudson
Where a contract is made in writing with a named person, a rogue who impersonates that person is not a party to it.
Facts
A rogue went to a car dealer in Leicester and agreed to buy a Mitsubishi Shogun car on hire purchase. He produced a driving licence he had stolen from Mr Durlabh Patel and signed the hire purchase agreement in Mr Patel's name. The dealer sent the agreement and a copy of the licence to Shogun Finance, which carried out a credit check on Mr Patel and approved the finance. The rogue paid a deposit and took the car, and then sold it to Mr Hudson, who bought it in good faith for £17,000. Under Part III of the Hire Purchase Act 1964, a private buyer who buys a car in good faith from a hirer under a hire purchase agreement obtains good title, so the question was whether the rogue was the hirer under the agreement.
Legal principle
The House of Lords held, by a majority of three to two, that the hire purchase agreement was made with Mr Patel, not with the rogue, so the rogue was not the hirer and Mr Hudson did not obtain title under the 1964 Act. Where a contract is in writing, the identity of the parties is determined by the written document, and the agreement was with the person named in it, Mr Patel, who had not authorised it. The face to face presumption did not apply, because Shogun dealt with the rogue only through the written agreement, with the dealer acting merely as a conduit. Lord Nicholls and Lord Millett dissented, arguing that the face to face rule should apply to all cases of identity fraud, which would have protected the innocent buyer.
Related cases on mistake
- Associated Japanese Bank (International) Ltd v Crédit du Nord SA [1989] 1 WLR 255
- Bell v Lever Brothers Ltd [1932] AC 161
- Couturier v Hastie (1856) 5 HLC 673
- Cundy v Lindsay (1878) 3 App Cas 459
- Great Peace Shipping Ltd v Tsavliris Salvage (International) Ltd [2002] EWCA Civ 1407, [2003] QB 679
- Hartog v Colin & Shields [1939] 3 All ER 566
- Ingram v Little [1961] 1 QB 31
- Lewis v Averay [1972] 1 QB 198
Studying contract law? Our tutors help you understand and apply cases like this in essays, problem questions and exams. Request a quote or browse our law notes.
This summary is for study and revision and is not legal advice. Although our case summaries are checked for accuracy, we do not guarantee that they are free from errors or omissions. Always read the full judgment for the court's reasoning.
