CONTRACT LAW CASES Complete Set Small PDF
CONTRACT LAW CASES Complete Set Small PDF
CONTRACT LAW CASES Complete Set Small PDF
Harvey sent a Telegram to Facey which stated: "Will you sell us Bumper Hall Pen? Telegraph lowest cash price-answer paid;"
Facey replied by telegram:"Lowest price for Bumper Hall Pen 900."
A Newspaper advert placed by the defendant stated:100 reward will be paid by the Carbolic Smoke Ball Company to any person
who contracts the influenza after having used the ball three times daily for two
weeks according to the printed directions supplied with each ball...
1000 is deposited with the Alliance Bank, shewing our sincerity in the
matter."
Boots introduced the then new self service system into their shops whereby
customers would pick up goods from the shelf put them in their basket and
then take them to the cash till to pay. The Pharmaceutical Society of Great
Britain brought an action to determine the legality of the system with regard to
the sale of pharmaceutical products which were required by law to be sold in
the presence of a pharmacist. The court thus needed to determine where the
contract came into existence.
The defendant had a flick knife displayed in his shop window with a price tag
on it. Statute made it a criminal offence to 'offer' such flick knives for sale. His
conviction was quashed as goods on display in shops are not 'offers' in the
technical sense but an invitation to treat. The court applied the literal rule of
statutory interpretation.
The defendant placed an advert in a classified section of a magazine offering
some bramble finches for sale. S.6 of the Protection of Birds Act 1954 made it
an offence to offer such birds for sale. He was charged and convicted of the
offence and appealed against his conviction.
Held:
The defendant's conviction was quashed. The advert was an invitation to treat
The claimant had submitted the highest (and only) bids at an auction stated to
be without reserve. The items were two Alan Smart engine analysers which
were worth 14,000. The claimant had submitted bids of 200 each. The
auctioneer refused to sell them at that price. The claimant brought an action
for breach of contract claiming damages of 27,600.
The claimant was injured in a car park partly due to the defendant's
negligence. The claimant was given a ticket on entering the car park after
putting money into a machine. The ticket stated the contract of parking was
subject to terms and conditions which were displayed on the inside of the car
park. One of the terms excluded liability for personal injuries arising through
negligence. The question for the court was whether the term was incorporated
into the contract ie had the defendant brought it to the attention of the claimant
before or at the time the contract was made. This question depended upon
Held:
Held:
page 1 / 12
The defendant offered to sell his house to the claimant and promised to keep
the offer open until Friday. On the Thursday the defendant accepted an offer
from a third party to purchase the house. The defendant then asked a friend to
tell the claimant that the offer was withdrawn. On hearing the news, the
claimant went round to the claimant's house first thing Friday morning
purporting to accept the offer. He then brought an action seeking specific
performance of the contract.
A father-in-law purchased a house for his son and daughter-in-law to live in.
The house was put in the father's name alone. He paid the deposit as a
wedding gift and promised the couple that if they paid the mortgage
instalments, the father would transfer the house to them. The father then
became ill and died. The mother inherited the house. After the father's death
the son went to live with his mother but the wife refused to live with the mother
and continued to pay the mortgage instalments. The mother brought an action
to remove the wife from the house.
The claimant wished to purchase some property from the defendant. The
terms had been agreed but no written contract had been completed. The
defendant promised the claimant that if he arranged for a bankers draft for the
deposit to be delivered to the defendant before 10.00 am on the 22nd
December he would complete the written contract. The claimant duly complied
with the request but the defendant refused to complete. The claimant brought
an action stating that unilateral contract existed and the defendant was thus
bound by that contract to complete the written contract for the sale of the
The defendant offered to sell a farm to the claimant for 1,000. The claimant
in reply offered 950 which the defendant refused. The claimant then sought
to accept the original offer of 1,000. The defendant refused to sell to the
claimant and the claimant brought an action for specific performance.
Held:
There was no contract. Where a counter offer is made this destroys the
The claimant sent a telex message from England offering to purchase 100
tons of Cathodes from the defendants in Holland. The defendant sent back a
telex from Holland to the London office accepting that offer. The question for
the court was at what point the contract came into existence. If the acceptance
Once valid acceptance takes place a binding contract is formed. It is therefore
was effective from the time the telex was sent the contract was made in
important to know what constitutes a valid acceptance in order to establish if
Holland and Dutch law would apply. If the acceptance took place when the
the parties are bound by the agreement. There are three main rules relating to telex was received in London then the contract would be governed by English
acceptance:
law.
The claimants were the suppliers of coal to the defendant railway company.
They had been dealing for some years on an informal basis with no written
contract. The parties agreed that it would be wise to have a formal contract
written. The defendant drew up a draft contract and sent it to the claimant. The
claimant made some minor amendments and filled in some blanks and sent it
back to the defendant. The defendant then simply filed the document and
never communicated their acceptance to the contract. Throughout this period
the claimants continued to supply the coal. Subsequently a dispute arose and
Held:
page 2 / 12
The defendant wrote to the claimant offering to sell them some wool and
asking for a reply 'in the course of post'. The letter was delayed in the post. On
receiving the letter the claimant posted a letter of acceptance the same day.
However, due to the delay the defendant's had assumed the claimant was not
interested in the wool and sold it on to a third party. The claimant sued for
breach of contract.
Held:
The defendant offered to sell a farm to the claimant for 1,000. The claimant
in reply offered 950 which the defendant refused. The claimant then sought
to accept the original offer of 1,000. The defendant refused to sell to the
claimant and the claimant brought an action for specific performance.
Held:
If the terms differ this will amount to a counter offer and no contract will exist:
There was no contract. Where a counter offer is made this destroys the
A lease gave the tenant an option to purchase the freehold of the property at a
price to be agreed by two surveyors one appointed by the tenant and one
appointed by the landlord. The tenant sought to exercise the option but the
landlord refused to appoint a surveyor. The landlord claimed that the clause
was too vague to be enforceable as it did not specify a price.
A mother promised to pay her daughter $200 per month if she gave up her job
in the US and went to London to study for the bar. The daughter was reluctant
to do so at first as she had a well paid job with the Indian embassy in
Washington and was quite happy and settled, however, the mother persuaded
her that it would be in her interest to do so. The mother's idea was that the
daughter could then join her in Trinidad as a lawyer. This initial agreement
wasn't working out as the daughter believed the $200 was US dollars whereas
the mother meant Trinidad dollars which was about less than half what she
A father-in-law purchased a house for his son and daughter-in-law to live in.
The house was put in the father's name alone. He paid the deposit as a
wedding gift and promised the couple that if they paid the mortgage
instalments, the father would transfer the house to them. The father then
became ill and died. The mother inherited the house. After the father's death
the son went to live with his mother but the wife refused to live with the mother
and continued to pay the mortgage instalments. The mother brought an action
to remove the wife from the house.
Held:
Held:
The agreement was a purely social and domestic agreement and therefore it
page 3 / 12
A husband left his wife and went to live with another woman. There was 180
left owing on the house which was jointly owned by the couple. The husband
signed an agreement whereby he would pay the wife 40 per month to enable
her to meet the mortgage payments and if she paid all the charges in
connection with the mortgage until it was paid off he would transfer his share
of the house to her. When the mortgage was fully paid she brought an action
for a declaration that the house belonged to her.
Esso ran a promotion whereby any person purchasing four gallons of petrol
would get a free coin from their World Cup Coins Collection. The question for
the court was whether these coins were 'produced in quantity for general
resale' if so they would be subject to tax and Esso would be liable to pay
200,000. Esso argued that the coins were simply a free gift and the
promotion was not intended to have legal effect and also that there was no
resale.
The claimant was an airline pilot working for the defendant. He was to be
made redundant. The defendants said that if he withdrew his contributions to
the company pension fund, they would pay him the equivalent of company
contributions in an ex gratia payment. The claimant agreed to this and
withdrew his contributions. The company then ran into further financial
difficulty and went back on their promise relating to the ex gratia payment.
Held:
The claimants and defendants entered an agreement for the supply of some
carbonised tissue paper. Under the agreement the claimants were to be the
defendant's sole agents in the US until March 1920. The contract contained an
honourable pledge clause which stated the agreement was not a formal or
legal agreement and shall not be subject to the jurisdiction of the courts in
neither England nor the US. The defendants terminated the agreement early
and the claimants brought an action for breach.
The facts were almost identical to those of Jones v Vernon Pools whereby the
claimant filled in a winning entry and sent it off to Littlewoods Pools.
Littlewoods disputed ever receiving the entry and denied the fact that they
would be legally obliged to pay out even if they had received the entry due to
the binding in honour only clause and based on the Court of Appeal precedent
set in Jones v Vernon Pools. The claimant, a litigant in person, argued that the
decision in Jones v Vernons was outdated and should be overruled.
Malaysia Mining Corporation Metals Ltd (MMC Metals) was a wholly owned
subsidiary of the defendant, MMC BHD. MMC Metals approached the
claimant KB Bank for a loan. MMC Metals was a relatively newly formed
company lacking in the size and resources of MMC BHD. The bank
approached MMC BHD asking if they would act as guarantor for the loan.
MMC refused to act as guarantor but stated they it was their company policy
to ensure that their subsidiaries are always in a position to meet their debts. In
reliance of this letter of comfort the bank advanced money to MMC Metals.
Coward was killed whilst riding pillion on a motorcycle driven by a friend and
work colleague on the way to work. The collision was due to the negligence of
the friend. Coward's widow sought to claim damages from the Motor
Insurance Bureau since the rider's insurance did not cover pillion passengers.
The Motor Insurance Bureau would only be obliged to pay if insurance for the
pillion was compulsory. Insurance was only compulsory for pillions if they were
carried for hire or reward. Coward paid the friend a small weekly sum to take
him to and from work each day. The widow therefore argued that this was a
page 4 / 12
Rules of consideration
The defendant had killed a man and was due to be hung for murder. He asked
the claimant to do everything in his power to obtain a pardon from the King.
The claimant went to great efforts and managed to get the pardon requested.
The defendant then promised to pay him 100 for his efforts but never paid
up.
A couple were getting married. The father of the bride entered an agreement
with the father of the groom that they would each pay the couple a sum of
money. The father of the bride died without having paid. The father of the son
also died so was unable to sue on the agreement. The groom made a claim
against the executor of the will.
Held:
Held:
page 5 / 12
An unmarried couple had a child together and lived together for five years.
The father then turned the mother out of the house and sent the child to live
with a neighbour and the father paid the neighbour 1 per week. The mother
then got a job as a live in house keeper and wished to have the daughter live
with her. The father agreed to allow the daughter live with the mother and
agreed to pay her 1 per week provided she ensured the child was well
looked after and happy. The father made payments but then when the mother
remarried he stopped making payments. The mother brought an action to
The claimant was a seaman on a voyage from London to the Baltic and back.
He was to be paid 5 per month. During the voyage two of the 12 crew
deserted. The captain promised the remaining crew members that if they
worked the ship undermanned as it was back to London he would divide the
wages due to the deserters between them. The claimant agreed. The captain
never made the extra payment promised.
The crew were entitled to the extra payment promised on the grounds that
either they had gone beyond their existing contractual duty or that the voyage
A purchaser of some coal paid the defendant to carry and to unload the coal.
The claimant was the supplier of the coal who had also paid the defendant to
carry and unload the coal. The claimant brought an action to recover the
money paid arguing the defendant was already under an existing duty to carry
and unload the coal and thus provided no consideration.
Held:
Held:
Held:
Dr Foakes owed Mrs Beer 2,000 after she had obtained judgment against
him in an earlier case. Dr Foakes offered to pay 500 immediately and the
rest by instalments, Mrs Beer agreed to this and agreed she would not seek
enforcement of the payment provided he kept up the instalments. No mention
was made in this agreement of interest although judgment debts generally
incurred interest. Dr Foakes paid all the instalments as agreed and Mrs Beer
then brought an action for the interest.
page 6 / 12
The claimants were money lenders in India. They lent money to the defendant
Lieutenant Temple who was an army officer serving in India. The claimants
sought return of the money from the claimant but were unable to get any
response so they contacted his father. Some correspondence went between
the claimant and the father's solicitors. The claimants asked how much the
father would be prepared to pay to settle the son's accounts. An amount was
agreed which was a substantial, amount although not the full amount due. The
claimant promised to send the promissory note relating to the son's debt to the
Promissory estoppel
High Trees leased a block of flats from CLP at a ground rent of 2,500. It was
a new block of flats at the time the lease was taken out in 1937. The
defendant had difficulty in getting tenants for all the flats and the ground rent
left High Trees with no profit. In 1940 many of the flats were still unoccupied
and with the conditions of the war prevailing, it did not look as if there was to
be any change to this situation in the near future. CLP agreed to reduce the
rent to 1,250 during the war years. The agreement was put in writing and
High Trees paid the reduced rent from 1941. When the war was over the flats
Tungsten had been infringing a patent right held by TMM. When TMM heard
of this they waived all infringements in return for Tungsten paying 10%
Royalty and also 30% 'compensation' if sales exceeded 50KG in any month.
These sums were excessive but Tungsten agreed to pay them otherwise they
would be faced with a claim for infringing the copyright. Tungsten struggled to
make payments. They got into arrears during the war times and an agreement
was reached to waive the 'compensation' payments during the war years.
A contract for the sale of some coffee beans was agreed to be payable in
pound sterling. The sellers mistakenly sent an invoice stating price was
payable in Kenyan Shillings. At the time the value of pound sterling and
Kenyan shillings was equal. The buyers accepted the delivery and invoice with
out objection. Subsequently the value of the pound fell quite dramatically in
relation to Kenyan shillings. The buyers then sought to revert to pound sterling
as stated in the contract.
By contract, the sellers agreed to sell 250 tons of coffee beans at 262 Kenyan
shillings per cwt to El Nasr payable on credit. At the time of the contract the
value of Kenyan shillings and pound sterling were of equal value. Whilst the
contract stipulated the price payable in Kenyan shillings, the credit account
referred payment in pound sterling. There were a number of other
discrepancies between the credit agreement and contract such as date of
shipping and the quantity to be shipped. These other discrepancies were
rectified in a revised agreement however, the new agreement still referred to
Held:
Her action failed. There was no pre-existing agreement which was later
modified by a promise. The wife sought to use promissory estoppel as sword
page 7 / 12
Mr Rees instructed the claimant to do some building work at his home to the
value of 746. Mr Rees paid 250 on account and the claimant reduced the
bill by 14 and there was a sum owing of 482. The claimant wrote to the
defendant several times pressing for payment but was unsuccessful there had
been no complaints as to the workmanship at this time. The claimant at the
time was in dire financial need and the business was verging on bankruptcy a
fact that Mrs Rees was aware of. The defendant telephoned the home and
Mrs Rees answered she made complaints about the work and said she would
Mrs Williams purchased a second hand Morris car on the basis that it was a
1948 model. The registration document stated it was first registered in 1948.
The following year her son used the car as a trade in for a brand new Hillman
Minx which he was purchasing from Oscar Chess. The son stated the car was
a 1948 model and on that basis the Oscar Chess offered 290 off the
purchase price of the Hillman. Without this discount Williams would not have
been able to go through with the purchase. 8 months later Oscar Chess ltd
found out that the car was in fact a 1939 model and worth much less than
Dick Bentley knew the defendant, who was a car trader specialising in the
prestige market, for some time. He had asked him to look out for a well vetted
Bentley car. The defendant obtained a Bentley and recommended it to the
claimant. He told him that the car had been owned by a German Baron and
had been fitted with a replacement engine and gearbox and had only done
20,000 miles since the replacement. Mr Bentley Purchased the car but it
developed faults. The defendant had done some work under the warranty but
then more faults developed. It transpired that the car had done nearer 100,000
Held:
Held:
Madame Poussard was in breach of condition and Spiers were entitled to end
Held:
Bettini was in breach of warranty and therefore the employer was not entitled
to end the contract. Missing the rehearsals did not go to the root of the
page 8 / 12
The defendant leased a computer from the claimant. The claimant was to pay
584 by 20 instalments every 3 months. A term of the lease agreement
provided that punctual payment was required and breach of this term would
entitle the lessor to terminate the agreement. The defendant got into arrears
with the instalments and the claimant took possession of the computer and
sold it on for 175. The claimant sued the defendant claiming arrears and all
future payments amounting to 6,869 in total.
The owners of the ship, The Mihalis Angelos, chartered the ship to the
defendant to use for the carriage of some cargo. A clause in the agreement
stated the ship was expected ready to load on 1st July. In fact the owners had
no grounds for believing the ship would be ready to load on that date as it was
in Hong Kong at the time and would not be ready until at least the 14th of July
and in fact it was not ready at that date. The defendant cancelled the contract
on 17th of July. The cargo that they expected to be carrying had not arrived
due to the bombing of a railway in Vietnam. The ship owners brought an
A contract for the sale 5,000 tons of soya beans required the buyers to give
the sellers 15 days notice of readiness of loading. This term was stated as a
condition. The buyers gave a shorter notice period and the sellers treated this
as terminating the contract and claimed damages. The price of soya beans
had dropped by over $60 per ton. The initial hearing was decide by arbitration
where it was held that the sellers were entitled to end the contract and
awarded $317.500 representing the decrease in value of the soya beans. The
buyers appealed to the High court who reversed this decision applying the
The claimant was a farmer who had a tenancy on the defendant's fields. The
claimant had planted corn and Barley on the fields and worked the fields to
ensure the crops would grow. Before the field was due to be harvested the
tenancy was terminated. The claimant then submitted a bill to the defendant
for the work and cost of seed spent on the field as was customary in farming
tenancies. The defendant refused to pay stating there was nothing in the
tenancy agreement stating that such compensation was payable.
This asks whether the term was necessary to give the contract business
efficacy ie would the contract make business sense without it? - The courts
will only imply a term where it is necessary to do so.
The claimant moored his ship at the defendant's wharf on the river Thames.
The river Thames is a tidal river and at times when the tide went out the ship
The officious bystander test:
Had an officious bystander been present at the time the contract was made
and had suggested that such a term should be included, it must be obvious
that both parties would have agreed to it.
The claimant had been employed as a managing director of Southern
Foundries the office of employment was to last for 10 years. Federated
page 9 / 12
The claimant was injured when he fell through some glass patio doors whilst
on holiday in Greece. The glass conformed to Greek safety standards but did
not conform to British safety standards. The claimant brought an action
against the travel agent asking for a term to be implied as a matter of law, that
all accommodation offered by the defendant should conform to British safety
standards.
The claimant, a car dealer, bought a car from the defendant for 334. He
painted the car and put it in his showroom and sold it to a customer for 400.
Two months later the car was impounded by the police as it had been stolen.
It was then returned to the original owner. Both the claimant and defendant
were unaware that the car had been stolen. The claimant returned the 400 to
the customer and brought a claim against the defendant under the Sale of
Goods Act.
The claimant purchased 1,000 tins of condensed milk from the defendant. The
tins were labelled 'Nissly'. Nestle told the claimant that if they attempted to sell
these on, they would apply for an injunction to prevent the sale as the label
was very similar to Nestle's labels for their condensed milk. The claimants
agreed not to sell them and brought an action against the sellers.
Held:
Held:
The claimant purchased some road marking machines from the defendant.
After the purchase a third party was granted a patent right in the machines.
This meant the claimant could not use the machines unless they were granted
a licence to do so. There was no breach of s.12(1) as at the time of the sale
the seller had the right to sell the goods. However, there was a breach of
s.12(2) in that the buyer could not enjoy quiet possession of the goods.
The claimant purchased a painting from the defendant for 6,000. The
painting was described in an auction catalogue as being by German
impressionist artist Gabrielle Munter. Both the buyers and the sellers were
London art dealers. The sellers were not experts on German paintings whilst
the buyers specialised in German paintings. The purchasers sent their experts
to inspect the painting before agreeing to purchase. After the sale the buyers
discovered that the painting was a fake and worth less than 100. They
brought an action based on s.13 Sale of Goods Act in that the painting was
A contract for the sale of a quantity of wooden staves for making barrels
described the staves as being 1/2 an inch thick. Some of the staves delivered
were not 1/2 an inch thick but very slightly out. There was nothing wrong with
the quality of the wood and they could still be used for the intended purpose of
making barrels. The buyer rejected the goods as the price of wood had fallen
and he could purchase them cheaper elsewhere.
Held:
A contract for the sale of 3,100 tins of peaches described the tins as being
packed in cases of 30. When they arrived the tins were packed in cases of 24
although the agreed overall number of tins was supplied.
Held:
The purchaser was entitled to reject the goods as they were not as described.
page 10 / 12
The defendant was a fisherman. He sold his fishing boat to the claimant. The
claimant brought an action against the defendant based on breach of S.14 of
the Sale of Goods Act as the boat was not of satisfactory quality. S.14 only
applies to the sale of goods sold in the course of a business. The defendant
argued that the sale of the boat was not in the course of his business. His
business was catching fish and selling them, he was not in the business of
buying and selling fishing boats.
The claimants purchased some liquid waterproofing from the defendant which
was contained in some heavy duty plastic pails. The pails were described as
The claimant purchased a second hand Jaguar car from the defendant car
dealer. The defendant told the claimant that the clutch was defective and that
this was a minor repair costing around 2-3. He gave the claimant the choice
of either taking the car as it was and knocking 25 off the stated price or he
would repair it and charge the full price. The buyer chose to take it with the
fault and get the discount. It then transpired that the fault would cost 84 to
repair. The buyer sought to bring a claim based on s.14.
The claimant booked into a hotel. In the hotel room on the back of the door a
notice sought to exclude liability of the hotel proprietors for any lost, stolen or
damaged property. The claimant had her fur coat stolen.
Held:
The notice was ineffective. The contract had already been made by the time
the claimant had seen the notice. It did not therefore form part of the contract.
The claimant purchased a cigarette vending machine for use in her cafe. She
signed an order form which stated in small print 'Any express or implied,
condition, statement of warranty, statutory or otherwise is expressly excluded'.
The vending machine did not work and the claimant sought to reject it under
the Sale of Goods Act for not being of merchantable quality.
The claimant took her wedding dress to the cleaners. She was asked to sign a
form. She asked the assistant what she was signing and the assistant told her
that it excluded liability for any damage to the beads. The form in fact
contained a clause excluding all liability for any damage howsoever caused.
The dress was returned badly stained.
Held:
Held:
page 11 / 12
A party seeking to rely on an unfair term must demonstrate that they gave
reasonable notice. ie they took reasonable steps to bring the term to the
Interfoto Picture Library v Stilletto [1989] QB 433
Reasonable notice of unfair terms
A party seeking to rely on an unfair term must demonstrate that they gave
reasonable notice. ie they took reasonable steps to bring the term to the
attention of a reasonable person:
The claimant was injured whilst stepping off a train. The railway company
displayed prominent notices on the platforms excluding liability personal injury
and damage to property due to negligence. The tickets also stated they were
subject to terms and conditions displayed on the platform. The claimant was
illiterate and could not read the signs. She argued that the exclusion clause
was not incorporated into the contract as the railway company had not brought
the clause to her attention at the time the contract was made.
The claimants ran a photo library the defendant was in advertising. The
claimants advanced some transparencies to the defendant for his perusal and
he was to get back to them as to which photos he would like to use. The
package of the photos contained a document stating that if any transparencies
were kept longer than 14 days a 5 +VAT holding fee would be charged per
photo per day. The defendant had not read this document and then forgot
about the transparencies and failed to return them for 6 weeks. The claimants
brought an action claiming a holding fee of 23,783 as specified in the
page 12 / 12
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)