Jenning v. Rundall & Leslie (R) Ltd. v. Sheill – Case Summary

Introduction

These cases reaffirm the protection granted to minors in contract law, emphasizing that minors cannot be held liable for breach of contract and that a contractual claim cannot be converted into a tort claim to impose liability on minors.

Jenning v. Rundall (1799)

Facts

A minor hired a mare for a short ride but overrode and injured it.
The plaintiff sued under contract law, but the contract was unenforceable due to the minor’s incapacity.
The plaintiff then attempted to sue under tort law for the damage caused.

Judgment

The court held that a claim founded on a contract cannot be turned into a tort claim to bypass the rule protecting minors.
Lord Kenyon emphasized that English law wisely protects minors from contractual liability.

Leslie (R) Ltd. v. Sheill (1914)

Facts

A minor fraudulently misrepresented his age to obtain a loan.
Since contracts with minors are void, the lender could not sue under contract law.
The lender then sued under tort law for deceit.

Judgment

The King’s Bench ruled that a minor cannot be sued in tort for deceit if the effect would be to indirectly enforce an unenforceable contract.
The court held that only actual money or property still in possession of the minor could be recovered under restitution.

Legal Principles Established

Minors are protected from contractual liability – Contracts with minors are void ab initio.
Contractual liability cannot be converted into tort liability – Plaintiffs cannot sue in tort to recover damages from a minor for a contract-based claim.
Restitution is limited – If the minor no longer possesses the benefit, the plaintiff cannot recover it.

Comparison of the Two Cases

Aspect	Jenning v. Rundall (1799)	Leslie (R) Ltd. v. Sheill (1914)
Nature of the Case	Minor caused property damage and was sued for negligence.	Minor fraudulently misrepresented age to obtain a loan.
Plaintiff’s Argument	Converted a contract claim into a tort claim.	Sued in tort for deceit to recover money.
Court’s Ruling	Minors cannot be sued in tort for contract-related claims.	Minors cannot be sued for deceit if it enforces an unenforceable contract.
Key Principle	Protects minors from indirect contractual liability through tort claims.	Only restitution for actual property or money still possessed is allowed.

Conclusion

Both cases reaffirm that minors are legally protected from contract enforcement.
Court rulings prevent plaintiffs from using tort claims to bypass contract law protections for minors.
Restitution is only allowed when the minor still possesses the benefit, not as general compensation.

Useful Links

Contact