What does this mean?

Question

This is a quote from my Equity text.

"A man was allowed to have a lease of a fishery set aside... He had taken the lease from his cousin, believing she was the owner of the fishery, when in fact his uncle, the previous owner, had left it to him. His name was not Eccles".

The case is Cooper v Phibbs (1987) LR 2 (HL) 149.

What does this mean about Eccles? Is it some kind of joke? I would be so grateful if anyone could explain it.

Thanks guys - I don't have any problem with the case which is straightforward, it's the reference to 'Eccles' that confuses me. As you said DavidB the name doesn't appear anywhere in the case as reported, I suppose Eccles could have been a minor witness or something but I have never seen a remark like that without some explanation in any of my textbooks before. This book is 'Equity and Trusts' by Michael Evans and he does seem a little more light-hearted than the usual law text writer, he has made little jokes in other places. I wondered if Eccles was a person famous for stupidity or something?

Answer 1

The case is unremarkable, and stands for the black letter law proposition that mutual mistake voids a contract. (and FYI, it was 1867, not 1987!)

From the case report itself - which is the source you should turn to if you can't understand something in a textbook:

"On 14 October 1863 the appellant, believing that the fishery had descended to the coheiresses of Edward Joshua Cooper, took a lease from the trustee for these coheiresses of the fishery at £ 550 a year for three years. The appellant, who was the nephew of the said Edward Joshua Cooper, then discovered that under a settlement of 1827, which bound the fishery the said Edward Joshua Cooper had been only tenant for life, and the appellant himself was entitled to the inheritance. He then brought the present suit to set aside the agreement."

I don't know what the Eccles reference is - it does not appear in the case or the House of Lords debate, the transcript of which appears in the case record.

Answer 2

The man can claim for the return of the lease payments because the fishery is actually owned by him by operation of law when it was found out that it was left to him by his uncle.

Answer 3

the term [Eccles] is the latin words use in some legal termenology means not included as far the legal contract is concerns try to read latin words in law text like for example,dura lex,juris,vox populi this are example

Answer 4

His uncle left it to "Eccles" but that's not his name. guessing