The claimant contractors agreed to build 112 houses for the defendant. During the negotiations, discrepancies were discovered between the bill of quantities and the drawings, and various changes were allegedly agreed prior to signing the contract, between the claimant and the borough's surveyor (who was the architect for the works). The contract did not contain these changes. It was held, on a claim for rectification, that the borough surveyor was in a position to negotiate the terms of the arrangement and the claimant was entitled to rely upon legal effect given to the agreement as part of the intention common to both side. The borough surveyor was acting within his ostensible authority to bind the corporation.
