MASTER PESTER
MASTER PESTER:
Introduction
By these proceedings the Claimant seeks a declaration that a Deed of Variation, dated 10 October 2022 (“the Deed”), is binding on the Defendant. The Claimant and the Defendant are parties to the Deed. The effect of the Deed, if valid and binding, is to transfer the Defendant’s 1/3 interest in the estate of Brigitte Genevieve Maghoo (hereafter, “the Deceased”) to the Claimant. The principal asset in the estate was the Deceased’s property at 33 Dancer Road, Fulham, London SW6 (“the Property”). The Property has been sold for £1,765,000.
The Defendant defends these proceedings on the basis that the Deed was never delivered and is not valid and binding. In the alternative, on the footing that the Deed was delivered, she counterclaims for an order setting aside the Deed for mistake.
On the last day of the three-day trial, the Defendant applied to amend her Defence. She now wishes to argue in the further alternative that if the Deed was delivered, it was subject to two conditions, one of which was not fulfilled. Whether I should permit this late amendment is one of the issues which I must determine in this judgment, having considered the parties’ cases in outline, the evidence given at trial and the factual background.
- Heading
- MASTER PESTER
- The parties’ positions in outline
- The evidence
- The facts
- Legal principles
- Setting aside a gift for mistake
- Discussion and analysis
- Issue 2: Is the Defendant entitled to set aside the Deed on ground of mistake?
- Issue 3: Should the Defendant be given permission to amend her claim to allege that the delivery of the Deed was subject to conditions?
- Conclusions
![PT-2023-001131 - [2025] EWHC 2728 (Ch)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_O3rEzCI.png)