Pigot’s Case: 1614

A written contact may be avoided if somebody makes a material alteration to it after it has been signed and without his consent.

Citations:

[1614] 11 Co Rep 266, [1572] EngR 180, (1572-1616) 11 Co Rep 26, (1572) 77 ER 1177

Links:

Commonlii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedRaiffeisen Zentralbank Osterreich A G v Crossseas Shipping Ltd and Others ComC 19-Mar-1999
ComC The rule in Pigot’s case. Whether alteration to a guarantee by the insertion of the name and address of a service agent was material so as to render the guarantee unenforceable. . .
CitedRaiffeisen Zentralbank Osterreich A G v Crossseas Shipping Ltd and Others CA 2000
The claimant creditor bank made changes to the guarantee executed by the guarantee without its approval and after it had been signed and duly executed, by inserting the details of a service agent.
Held: The insertion did not work to alter the . .
CitedPickenham Romford Ltd v Deville ChD 31-Jul-2013
The claimant company’s administrators sought an order to have vacated unilateral notices entered against land titles registered to the claimant. The court now gave its reasons for making the order as requested by way of summary relief. The notices . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contract

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.415074