Fong v Douglas

The case of Fong v Douglas involved a dispute over the enforceability of a deed granting a call option over land. The plaintiff, Fong, sought to enforce a deed granting him a call option to purchase land from the defendant, Douglas. The deed in question provided for a mutual grant of put and call options, but only the grantor of the call option, Douglas, signed the deed. Fong contended that the deed was enforceable despite the absence of his signature, while Douglas argued that the deed was not binding due to the lack of bilateral execution and that he had a contractual right of rescission.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether a deed granting a call option over land requires bilateral execution to be effective. The court also considered whether the signed deed was delivered by the grantor and whether a contractual right of rescission had been established. The court examined the principles of contract law and conveyancing to determine the enforceability of the deed.

In its reasoning, the court held that a deed granting a call option over land does not necessarily require bilateral execution to be effective. The court found that the signed deed had been delivered by Douglas to Fong, and that there was no evidence of a contractual right of rescission. The court concluded that the deed was valid and enforceable despite the absence of Fong's signature. The court further held that the principles of equity and estoppel applied to prevent Douglas from asserting that the deed was unenforceable due to the lack of bilateral execution.

The court ordered that the deed be enforced as between the parties, and that Fong was entitled to exercise the call option granted by the deed. The court also awarded costs to Fong.