Cundy v Lindsay [1878]

Cundy v Lindsay [1877–78] LR 3 App Cas 459 is a notable English contract law case that revolves around the theme of mistake, specifically introducing the concept that contracts could be automatically voided if a mistake as to identity is of crucial importance. This case has sparked debates among legal experts regarding its alignment with subsequent cases, particularly Phillips v Brooks [1919], which suggests that contracts involving face-to-face interactions are merely voidable for fraud rather than automatically void.

Lindsay & Co initiated legal action against Cundy to reclaim handkerchiefs after being defrauded by a rogue who sold the goods to Cundy. Lindsay & Co, a manufacturer of linen handkerchiefs, had received correspondence from a person claiming to be Blenkiron & Co, leading them to believe it was a reputable business. Consequently, they delivered a large order of handkerchiefs to the fraudster. The central issue for the court was determining which innocent party should bear the loss of the goods.

The Divisional Court initially ruled in favour of Cundy, asserting that Lindsay could not recover the handkerchiefs. However, the Court of Appeal, with Mellish LJ, Brett J, and Amphlett JA, overturned this decision, holding that the mistake about the identity of the rogue rendered the contract void from the outset. The House of Lords affirmed this decision, emphasising that Lindsay & Co had intended to deal exclusively with Blenkiron & Co, and there was no agreement or contract with the rogue.

Lord Cairns, in explaining the mistake as to identity, highlighted the absence of a consensus of mind between Lindsay & Co and the dishonest man. The contract was deemed void, and Cundy had to return the goods.

The case's significance lies in its assertion that the contract was void, not voidable, introducing a distinction from other cases. However, this distinction has faced criticism from legal commentators and the courts. In subsequent developments, including Shogun Finance Ltd v Hudson [2003], Lord Nicholls expressed dissent, labelling the principle as eroded.

The distinction drawn between fraudulent misrepresentation regarding attributes and identity has been deemed unconvincing and a reproach to the law. Despite being over a century old, Cundy v Lindsay's impact persists, prompting questions about whether the remaining distinction should still be regarded as good law in the evolving landscape of contract law.
Back to blog

UOL Case Bank

Upon joining, you become a valuable UOL student and gain instant access to over 2,100 essential case summaries. UOL Case Bank is constantly expanding. Speed up your revision with us now.

Subscribe Now

Where are our students from?

Council of Europe
Crown Prosecution Service
Baker Mckenzie 
Yale University
University of Chicago
Columbia University
New York University
University of Michigan 
INSEAD
University of London
University College London (UCL)
London School of Economics (LSE)
King’s College London (KCL)
Royal Holloway, University of London 
Birkbeck, University of London
SOAS, University of London
University of Manchester
University of Zurich
University of York
Brandeis University
University of Exeter
University of Sheffield
Boston University
University of Washington
University of Leeds
University of Law
University of Kent
University of Hull
Queen’s University Belfast
Toronto Metropolitan University
Hong Kong University of Science and Technology
University of Buckingham
ESSEC Business School

  • Criminal Practice

    Diagrams and Charts

    Our carefully designed diagrams and charts will guide you through complex legal issues.

  • Criminal Law

    Clear and Succinct Definitions

    Key concepts are concisely defined to help you understand legal topics quickly.

  • Property Law

    Statutory Provisions

    Statutory provisions are provided side by side with legal concepts to help you swiftly locate the relevant legislation.

  • Public Law

    Case Summaries

    We have summarised important cases for you so that you don't need to read long and boring cases.

  • Evidence

    Rules and Exceptions

    Rules and exceptions are clearly listed so that you know when a rule applies and when it doesn't.

  • Company Law

    Terminology

    Legal terms and key concepts are explained at the beginning of each chapter to help you learn efficiently.

  • Case Law

    Case law is provided side by side with legal concepts so that you know how legal principles and precedents were established.

  • Law Exam Guide

    Law Essay Guide

    You will learn essential law exam skills and essay writing techniques that are not taught in class.

  • Law Exam Guide

    Problem Question Guide

    We will show you how to answer problem questions step by step to achieve first-class results.

  • Conflict of Laws

    Structured Explanations

    Complex legal concepts are broken down into concise and digestible bullet point explanations.

  • Legal System and Method

    Legal Research

    You will learn legal research techniques with our study guide and become a proficient legal researcher.

  • Jurisprudence and Legal Theory

    Exam-focused

    All essential concepts, principles, and case law are included so that you can answer exam questions quickly.