Leaf v International Galleries [1950]

Court: Court of Appeal

Facts: Ernest Louis Leaf bought a painting from International Galleries on March 8, 1944, believing it to be a John Constable of Salisbury Cathedral. International Galleries assured Leaf of the painting's authenticity, and he paid £85 for it. However, when Leaf tried to auction the painting five years later, he found out it was not by Constable. Leaf then sought to rescind the contract and get his money back.

Issue: The central issue was whether rescission was still available given the passage of five years since the discovery of the misrepresentation.

Held: The Court of Appeal held that rescission was barred due to the significant lapse of time.

Key Judicial Statements - Denning LJ: Denning LJ acknowledged that while there was a mistake regarding the painting’s artist, the contract was not void because the essential subject matter—a painting—remained unchanged. He pointed out that while the artist’s identity might be a condition of the contract (breach of which could allow termination), it could also be seen as a warranty (where damages would be the only remedy). Denning LJ rejected the idea that rescission could be granted for innocent misrepresentation after such a delay. He concluded that a claim for rescission was barred due to the lapse of time and that Leaf’s remedy was thus limited.

💡 Leveluplaw: This case highlights the importance of timely action when seeking rescission for misrepresentation. The court's decision underscores that even if a misrepresentation is innocent, a significant delay in seeking rescission can bar the remedy, emphasizing the need for prompt action in addressing contract disputes.