“Face-to-face contracts are voidable for fraud, not void for identity mistake.”
The Court of Appeal held for Averay. The contract was voidable for fraud but not void for mistake, so Averay acquired good title before the contract was avoided.
Lewis agreed to sell his car to a fraudster who falsely claimed to be Richard Greene, the TV actor. The fraudster provided convincing proof of identity and paid by cheque. He then sold the car to innocent purchaser Averay before the cheque bounced.
Whether the contract between Lewis and the fraudster was void for mistake as to identity or merely voidable for fraud, determining whether Averay acquired good title.
The court established a presumption that in face-to-face dealings, parties intend to contract with the person physically present, regardless of that person's attributes or claimed identity. The contract is therefore valid but voidable for any fraudulent misrepresentation.
This case restored clarity to the law on identity mistakes and established the modern approach favoring protection of innocent third parties. It effectively overruled Ingram v Little and remains good law, confirmed by later House of Lords decisions.
In face-to-face dealings, there is a presumption that parties intend to contract with the person physically present, making contracts voidable for fraud rather than void for mistake as to identity.
The Court of Appeal held that the innocent third party purchaser acquired good title because the original contract was only voidable for fraud, not void.
It established the modern approach to identity mistakes, protecting innocent third parties and providing certainty by creating a clear presumption for face-to-face dealings.
Lord Denning MR criticized the decision in Ingram v Little as inconsistent with principle and productive of injustice to innocent purchasers.
OSCOLA Citation
Lewis v Averay [1972] 1 QB 198
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
[2026] UKSC 1
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.