[2025] UKUT 178 (LC)

The respondent was therefore prevented from offering any evidence at the hearing before the FTT, which took place on 18 October 2024; she was represented at that hearing by Ms Gabriella Sam-Yorke. The appellant’s former solicitor gave evidence; he was not cross-examined by Ms Sam-Yorke although I understand, from Mr Grant KC, that he was nevertheless questioned by the judge.

The judge set out the evidence of the appellant’s solicitor. She also referred to an email addressed to Mr Saood from the estate agents who sold the property, dated 21 November 2023, which said:

“We were completely unaware of any land remote from the subject properties and in particular 39 Gordon Place which indicated this land which we now understand to be off Thornton Road would be included…Our records show you agreed a sale subject to contract on 19 November 2019 to Ms Philomena Sam-Yorke following an arranged and accompanied viewing for the aforementioned part a 9:30 on 17^th November 2018. As we were not availed of knowing of this remote piece of land in Thornton Road until now we couldn’t possibly commit to selling something we were not aware of at the time.”

The judge said that since neither the respondent nor the estate agent had provided a witness statement and neither was available for cross-examination she gave no weight either to the respondent’s grounds of objection or to the estate agent’s email. She discussed the law, considered the evidence and said that:

The judge concluded that there was no convincing proof of a common intention to exclude the Disputed Land from the sale, and refused rectification on the basis of common mistake. She also refused rectification on the basis of unilateral mistake, and there is no appeal from that.