Leslie v. Sheill 1914 (Case Summary)

This case established the principle that a minor cannot be held liable for fraudulent misrepresentation about their age to obtain a loan, as it would indirectly enforce a void contract, contravening the protections afforded to minors under English law.

Facts of Leslie v Sheill

1. The defendant, Sheill, a minor, fraudulently misrepresented his age to Leslie, the plaintiff, to obtain a loan.
2. Upon discovering the misrepresentation, Leslie sought to recover the money advanced, claiming fraudulent misrepresentation by the defendant.
3. Sheill argued that as a minor, he was not legally bound by the loan agreement and that the claim effectively sought to enforce a void contract.

Issues framed

1. Whether a minor can be held liable for fraudulent misrepresentation for a contract they are otherwise incapable of entering into?
2. Whether the recovery of money advances to a minor amount to the enforcement of a void contract?

Judgment of Leslie v Sheill 

The Court examined principles governing contracts with minors and the protection offered under English common law.

The Court held that a minor cannot be made liable for fraudulent misrepresentation about their age if the recovery of money advanced indirectly enforces a void contract.It emphasized that the law protects minors from being bound by contractual obligations, and this protection cannot be circumvented through claims of fraud. Restitutionary claims are also barred where they would result in enforcing a void contract.

The Court dismissed the plaintiff’s claim, holding that the minor could not be compelled to repay the money advanced.