Rankin v Scott Fell & Co

In *Rankin v Scott Fell & Co*, the High Court of Australia considered a dispute arising from a contract for the sale of land. The appellant, Rankin, sought to recover a deposit paid under the contract, alleging that the respondent, Scott Fell & Co, had failed to fulfil its obligations. The core of the disagreement lay in the interpretation of the contract's description of the land being sold.

The central legal issue before the High Court was whether extrinsic evidence could be admitted to clarify the subject-matter of the contract, specifically the description of the land. This question arose because the contractual description was alleged to be ambiguous, leading to uncertainty about the precise parcel of land intended to be conveyed.

The Court held that where a written contract contains an ambiguity or uncertainty regarding the subject-matter, extrinsic evidence may be admitted to explain that ambiguity. This principle allows for the admission of evidence that identifies the subject-matter, provided it does not contradict or alter the terms of the written agreement. The Court found that the ambiguity in the description of the land was such that extrinsic evidence was necessary to ascertain the true intention of the parties and the specific property that was the subject of the sale. The appeal was dismissed.