Lesion Or Deception D’outremoitie Du Juste Prix

Question 1

Cue Card 1: Basic Definition
What Is It?

Answer 1

An ancient doctrine in Jersey (and French) law that allows the seller of land to challenge a contract if the agreed sale price is less than 50% of the land’s true market value (juste prix).
Known historically as “la clameur révocatoire,” with roots in Roman law (laesio enormis).
Why an Exception?
Normally, courts uphold freely made bargains (la convention fait la loi des parties).
Here, a gross undervaluation (under half the true price) triggers a special remedy.

Question 2

Cue Card 2: Key Modern Case – Snell v Beadle

Answer 2

Facts: Concerned a land transaction granting a servitude (not a typical sale).
Privy Council Ruling:
Doctrine applies only to a true sale of land where a “just price” can be objectively determined.
Because Snell involved a servitude (hard to value), the claim for déception d’outre moitié failed.
Remedies:
Primary remedy: Buyer can “top up” the price if it was under half the property’s value.
If actual fraud (dol personnel) is proven, the seller may immediately rescind (no right to top up).

Question 3

Cue Card 3: Dol Réel vs. Dol Personnel
Dol Réel (or Dol Ipso):

Answer 3

The mere shortfall (price < 50% of market value) itself is considered a “real dol.”
No need to prove intentional fraud – just a major discrepancy.
The buyer can usually fix it by paying the shortfall.
Dol Personnel (Fraud):
The buyer knew or intentionally exploited the seller’s ignorance.
If found, the seller can rescind the contract immediately.
The buyer loses the option to “top up” and keep the deal.

Question 4

Cue Card 4: Conditions & Limits

Answer 4

Applies Only to:
Sale of immovable property (land) – not leases, gifts, servitudes, or personal property.
The shortfall must be clearly measurable (< 50% of the genuine market price).
Exclusions:
Public Auctions: Price is set by open bidding.
Bargain Prices: If both sides knowingly agree to a “cheap” deal.
Uncertain Events: If the contract’s final benefit depends on future risk (not purely a fixed sale).
Difficult Valuation: If it’s too hard to establish a “just price” (e.g., a grant of servitude).
Time Limit:
Traditionally up to 30 years to bring an action (very long by modern standards).

Question 5

Cue Card 5: Modern Importance & Critiques

Answer 5

Rarely Used
Modern courts favor respecting freely made contracts.
Easier to rely on misrepresentation, undue influence, or dol if genuine unfairness occurred.
Snell v Beadle Emphasis
The Privy Council took a restrictive view, implying déception d’outre moitié is a narrow exception.
Buyer’s “top-up” right shows the courts prefer to preserve contracts rather than voiding them outright.
Comparative Law
French law still recognizes lésion (arts. 1118, 1674 CC), but it’s controversial.
Many legal systems have abolished or rarely apply laesio enormis.
Some see the doctrine as outdated, better handled via fraud, mistake, or equitable remedies.