Sharplin v Henderson
| Sharplin v Henderson | |
|---|---|
|  | |
| Court | Court of Appeal of New Zealand | 
| Full case name | Sharplin v Henderson | 
| Decided | 28 June 1988 | 
| Citation | [1990] 2 NZLR 134 | 
| Court membership | |
| Judges sitting | Cooke P, McMullin J Hardie Boys | 
Sharplin v Henderson [1990] 2 NZLR 134 is a cited case in New Zealand regarding the requirement under section 7(4)(b) of the Contractual Remedies Act 1970 that a breach of a contract must be "substantial" for a contract to be cancelled.[1]
Background
Sharplin purchased a Tauranga orchard from Henderson.
After the sale, it was discovered that the real estate agent had misrepresented that 900 trees belonged to the property, representing 25% of the property.
Sharplin sued for misrepresentation.
Held
The misrepresentation was substantial, and relief was granted.