CONTRACT LAW CASES Complete Set Small PDF

Flashcard Set Title: "CONTRACT LAW CASES - complete set"
Study this set online at: http://www.flashcardexchange.com/cards/contract-law-cases-complete-set-2521514
Harvey v Facey [1893] UKPC 1

Offer
In order to amount to an offer it must
Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball co [1893] 1 QB 256
Offer
In order to amount to an offer it must be shown that
the offeror had the intention to be bound:
Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain v Boots
[1953] 1 QB 401
Goods on display in shops
Goods on display in shops are generally not offers
Fisher v Bell [1961] 1 QB 394

Goods on display in shops
Goods on display in shops are
Partridge v Crittenden (1968) 2 All

ER 421
Advertisements
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
Spencer v Harding Law Rep. 5 C. P. 561

Contract by Tender
The request for tenders represents an invitation to
treat and each tender submitted amounts to an offer
unless the request specifies that it will accept the
The defendants advertised a sale by tender of the stock in trade belonging

Eilbeck & co. The advertisement specified where the goods could be viewed,
the time of opening for tenders and that the goods must be paid for in cash.
No reserve was stated. The claimant submitted the highest tender but the
defendant refused to sell to him.
Heathcote Ball v Barry [2000] EWCA Civ 235

Auctions
Where an auction takes place with reserve, each
bid is an offer which is then accepted by the
auctioneer. Where the auction takes place without
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.
Thornton v Shoe Lane Parking [1971]

2 WLR 585 Court of Appeal
Machines
The machine represents the offer, the
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

Ramsgate Victoria Hotel v Montefoire (1866) LR 1 Ex 109

Termination of offers
An offer may be terminated by:
1. Death of offeror or offeree
2. Lapse of time
The defendant offered to purchase shares in the claimant company at a

certain price. Six months later the claimant accepted this offer by which time
the value of the shares had fallen. The defendant had not withdrawn the offer
but refused to go through with the sale. The claimant brought an action for
specific performance of the contract.
Held:
Dickinson v Dodds (1876) 2 Ch D 463

3. Revocation
An offeror may revoke an offer at any
time before acceptance takes place:
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.
Errington v Errington Woods [1952] 1 KB 290 Court

of Appeal
Revocation
An offeror may revoke an offer at any time before
acceptance takes place:
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.
Dahlia v Four Millbank Nominees [1978] Ch 231

Court of Appeal
Revocation
An offeror may revoke an offer at any time before
acceptance takes place:
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
Hyde v Wrench (1840) 49 ER 132 Chancery

Division (Decided by Lord Langdale MR)
Counter offer
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.
A counter offer is where an offeree responds to an
Held:
There was no contract. Where a counter offer is made this destroys the
Entorres v Miles Far East [1955] 2 QB 327 Court of Appeal

Acceptance
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.
Felthouse v Bindley [1862] EWHC CP

J35 Court of Common Pleas
The general rule is that the offeror
must receive the acceptance before it
A nephew discussed buying a horse from his uncle. He offered to purchase

the horse and said if I don't hear from you by the weekend I will consider him
mine. The horse was then sold by mistake at auction. The auctioneer had
been asked not to sell the horse but had forgotten. The uncle commenced
proceedings against the auctioneer for conversion. The action depended upon
whether a valid contract existed between the nephew and the uncle.
Brogden v Metropolitan Railway

(1877) 2 App. Cas. 666
Acceptance can be through
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

Butler Machine Tool v Ex-Cell-O

Corporation [1979] 1 WLR 401
Court of Appeal
Ex-Cell-O wished to purchase a machine from Butler. Butler sent out a

quotation of 75,535 along with a copy of their standard terms of sale. The
terms included a price variation clause and a term that the seller's terms would
prevail over any terms submitted by a purchaser. The machine would be
delivered in 10 months. Ex-Cell-O put in an order for the machine at the stated
price and sent a set of their terms which did not include the price variation
clause. The order contained an acknowledgement slip which required a
signature by Butler and was to be returned to Ex-Cell-O. This slip stated that
Adams v Lindsell (1818) 106 ER 250

The postal rule
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.
Where it is agreed that the parties will use the post

as a means of communication the postal rule will
Hyde v Wrench (1840) 49 ER 132 Chancery Division (Decided by Lord
Langdale MR)
The terms of the acceptance must exactly match the terms of the offer.
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
Scammell and Nephew v Ouston

[1941] AC 251 House of Lords
The agreement must be certain
The parties entered an agreement whereby Scammell were to supply a van

for 286 on HP terms over 2 years and Ouston was to trade in his old van for
100. There was then some disagreement and Scammel refused to supply the
van.
Held:
There was no certainty as to the terms of the agreement. Whilst there was
Sudbrook Trading Estate v Eggleton

[1983] AC AC 444 House of Lords
The agreement must be certain
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.
Jones v Padavatton [1969] 1 WLR 328

Court of Appeal
Intention to create legal relations in
social and domestic agreements
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
Balfour v Balfour [1919] 2 KB 571

Intention to create legal relations in
social and domestic agreements
In social and domestic agreements the
A husband worked overseas and agreed to send maintenance payments to

his wife. At the time of the agreement the couple were happily married. The
relationship later soured and the husband stopped making the payments. The
wife sought to enforce the agreement.
Errington v Errington Woods [1952] 1 KB 290 Court

of Appeal
In social and domestic agreements the law raises a
presumption that the parties do not intend to create
legal relations:
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

Merritt v Merritt [1970] 1 WLR 1211 Court of Appeal

legal relations:
This presumption may be rebutted by evidence to
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.
Simpkins v Pays [1955] 1 WLR 975 Queen's Bench

Division
legal relations:
A Grandmother, granddaughter and a lodger entered into a weekly

competition run by the Sunday Empire News. The coupon was sent in the
Grandmothers name each week and all three made forecasts and they took it
in turns to pay. They had agreed that if any of them won they would share the
winnings between them. The grandmother received 250 in prize money and
refused to share it with the other two. The lodger brought the action to claim
one third of the prize money.
Esso Petroleum v Customs & Excise [1976] 1 WLR 1 House of Lords

Intention to create legal relations in commercial agreements
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.
Where an agreement is made in a commercial context, the law raises a

presumption that the parties do intend to create legal relations by the
agreement:
Edwards v Skyways [1964] 1 WLR 349 Court of

Appeal
Intention to create legal relations in commercial
agreements
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:
Rose & Frank Co v Crompton Bros [1925] AC 445 House of Lords

Intention to create legal relations in commercial agreements
Where an agreement is made in a commercial context, the law raises a
presumption that the parties do intend to create legal relations by the
agreement:Again this presumption can be rebutted by evidence to the
contrary:
Binding in honour only clauses:
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.
Ferrera v Littlewoods Pools [1998] EWCA Civ 618

Court of Appeal
agreements
Where an agreement is made in a commercial
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.
Kleinwort Benson (KB) v Malaysia Mining

Corporation BHD (MMC BHD) [1989] 1 WLR 379
Court of Appeal
agreements
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 v MIB [1963] 1 QB 359 Court of Appeal

The distinction between social and domestic
agreements and commercial agreements can be
fine.
Compare the case:
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

Albert v MIB [1971] 3WLR 291 House of Lords

The distinction between social and domestic
agreements and commercial agreements can be
fine.
Compare the case:
A docker was killed in a road collision on his way to work. He was a

passenger in a car owned and driven by a work colleague. The driver gave
lifts to the deceased and other dockers in return for payment. He had given
lifts to different dockers over a period of eight years. A claim was made
against the Motor Insurance Bureau (MIB) as the driver had no insurance
cover for passengers. The MIB was only obliged to pay if there existed a
contract between the docker and the driver.
In contract law consideration is

concerned with the bargain of the
contract. A contract is based on an
exchange of promises. Each party to a
Consideration must be something of value in the eyes of the law - (Thomas v

Thomas) (1842) 2 QB 851. This excludes promises of love and affection,
gaming and betting etc. A one sided promise which is not supported by
consideration is a gift. The law does not enforce gifts unless they are made by
deed.
Whilst the common law strictly adheres to the requirement of consideration
(although in some instances the courts seem to go to some lengths to invent
consideration eg Ward v Byham [1956] 1 WLR 496, Williams v Roffey Bros
There are various rules governing the law of consideration:
Rules of consideration
1. The consideration must not be past.

2. The consideration must be sufficient but need not be adequate.
3. The consideration must move from the promisee.
Re McArdle (1951) Ch 669 Court

of Appeal
Consideration must not be past:
Majorie McArdle carried out certain improvements and repairs on a bungalow.

The bungalow formed part of the estate of her husband's father who had died
living the property to his wife for life and then on trust for Majorie's husband
and his four siblings. After the work had been carried out the brothers and
sisters signed a document stating in consideration of you carrying out the
repairs we agree that the executors pay you 480 from the proceeds of sale.
However, the payment was never made.
Lampleigh v Braithwaite [1615] EWHC

KB J17
Consideration must not be past:
Past consideration may be valid
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.
Chappel v Nestle [1960] AC 87 House of Lords

Consideration must be sufficient but need not be
adequate:
There is no requirement that the consideration must
be market value, providing something of value is
Nestle ran a sales promotion whereby if persons sent in 3 chocolate bar

wrappers and a postal order for 1 shilling 6d they would be sent a record.
Chappel owned the copyright in one of the records offered and disputed the
right of Nestle to offer the records and sought an injunction to prevent the
sales of the records which normally retailed at 6 shillings 8d. Under s.8 of the
Copyright Act 1956 retailers were protected from breach of copyright if they
gave notice to the copyright holders of the ordinary retail selling price and paid
them 6.25% of this. Nestle gave notice stating the ordinary selling price was
Tweddle v Atkinson [1861] EWHC QB

J57 Queen's Bench Division
Consideration must move from the
promisee
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.
Collins v Godefrey (1831) 1 B & Ad

950 King's Bench Division
An existing public duty will not amount
to valid consideration
The claimant, Collins, had been subpoenaed to attend court as a witness in

separate court case involving the defendant, Godefrey. Godefrey had sued his
attorney for malpractice and Collins was required by the court to attend as an
expert witness. In fact Collins never gave evidence but was required to be on
standby for six days in case he was called. After the trial Collins gave
Godefrey an invoice to cover his time spent at court and demanded payment
by the next day. Without giving him the full day to pay, Collins commenced an
action to enforce payment.
Held:
Held:
page 5 / 12

Glasbrook Bros v Glamorgan County Council [1925]

AC 270 House of Lords
An existing public duty will not amount to valid
consideration
The defendant owners of a colliery asked the police to provide protection

during a miner's strike. The police provided the protection as requested and
provided the man power as directed by the defendants although they disputed
the level of protection required to keep the peace. At the end of the strike the
police submitted an invoice to cover the extra costs of providing the protection.
The defendants refused to pay arguing that the police were under an existing
public duty to provide protection and keep the peace.
Ward v Byham [1956] 1 WLR 496

Court of Appeal
An existing public duty will not amount
to valid consideration
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
Stilk v Myrick [1809] EWHC KB J58

King's Bench Division
An existing contractual duty will not
amount to valid consideration
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.
Hartley v Ponsonby [1857] 7 EB 872

If a party has an existing contractual
Half of a ship's crew deserted on a voyage. The captain promised the

remaining crew members extra money if they worked the ship and completed
the voyage. The captain then refused to pay up.
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
Williams v Roffey Bros [1990] 2 WLR

1153
The defendants were building contractors who entered an agreement with

Shepherds Bush Housing Association to refurbish a block of 27 flats. This
contract was subject to a liquidated damages clause if they did not complete
the contract on time. The defendants engaged the claimant to do the
carpentry work for an agreed price of 20,000. 6 months after commencing
the work, the claimant realised he had priced the job too low and would be
unable to complete at the originally agreed price. He approached the
defendant who had recognised that the price was particularly low and was
Scotson v Pegg [1861] EWHC Exch J2

An existing contractual duty will not amount to valid
consideration
If a party has an existing contractual duty to do an
act, this act can not be used as consideration for a
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:
Pinnel's Case 1602 5 Rep, 117 Court of Common Pleas

Pinnel's Case 1602 5 Rep, 117 Court of Common Pleas
Part payment of a Debt
Part payment of a debt is not valid consideration for a promise to release the The claimant was owed 8 10 shillings. The defendant paid 5 2 shillings and
debt in full:
2p. The claimant sued for the amount outstanding.
Part payment of a debt is not valid consideration for a promise to forebear the
balance unless at the promisor's request part payment is made:
Held:
a). before the due date
b). with a chattel
The claimant was entitled to the full amount even if they agreed to accept less.
Foakes v Beer (1883-84) LR 9 App Cas 605 House of Lords
Part payment of a debt is not valid consideration for a promise to forebear the
balance unless at the promisor's request part payment is made:
a). before the due date
b). with a chattel
c). to a different destination
This rule from Pinnel's case was affirmed by the House of Lords in:
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

Hirachand Punamchand v Temple

[1911] 2 KB 330 Court of Appeal
Part payment of a Debt
Where part payment is made by a
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
Promissory estoppel is an equitable doctrine which in some instances can

stop a person going back on a promise which is not supported by
consideration. Promissory estoppel was developed by an obiter statement by
Denning J (as he then was) in Central London Property Trust Ltd v High Trees
Ltd [1947] KB 130 (Case summary). Denning J based the doctrine on the
decision in Hughes v Metropolitan Railway (1876-77) L.R. 2 App. Cas. 439
(Case summary). The House of Lords affirmed the existence of promissory
estoppel in contract law in Tool Metal Manufacturing v Tungsten [1955] 1 WLR
Central London Property Trust v High

Trees House [1947] KB 130 High
Court
Promissory estoppel was developed
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
Hughes v Metropolitan Railway

(1876-77) LR 2 App Cas 439 House of
Lords
Denning J based the doctrine of
A landlord gave a tenant 6 months notice to carry out repairs failure to do so

would result in forfeiture of the lease. The landlord and tenant then entered
into negotiations for the tenant to purchase the freehold of the property. It was
thought by both parties that a conveyance of the property would take place.
The tenant had not carried out the repairs as they believed they would be
purchasing the freehold and the repairs required by the landlord were not
essential to his use of the property. At the last minute negotiations broke down
and the Landlord gave the tenant notice to quit for failure to carry out the
Tool Metal Manufacturing v Tungsten

[1955] 1 WLR 761 House of Lords
The House of Lords affirmed the
existence of promissory estoppel in
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.
Combe v Combe [1951] 2 KB 215

Court of Appeal
Requirements of promissory estoppel:
A husband promised to make maintenance payments to his estranged wife

but failed to do so. The wife brought an action to enforce the promise invoking
promissory estoppel.
Woodhouse A.C. Israel Cocoa Ltd. v.

Nigerian Product Marketing Co. Ltd.
[1972] AC 741
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.
Alan v El Nasr [1972] 2 WLR 800

Requirements of promissory
estoppel:
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

D & C Builders v Rees [1966] 2 WLR

28 Court of Appeal
It must be inequitable to allow the
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
Esso Petroleum v Mardon [1976] QB 801 Court of Appeal

Statements made during the course of negotiations can be classified as
either:
1. An express term - if not fulfilled the innocent party may bring an action for
breach of contract.
2. A representation - if not fulfilled the innocent party may bring an action for
misrepresentation.
3. As part of a collateral contract - the innocent party may sue on the collateral
Mr Mardon entered a tenancy agreement with Esso Petroleum in respect of a

new Petrol station. Esso's experts had estimated that the petrol station would
sell 200,000 gallons of petrol. This estimate was based on figures which were
prepared prior to planning application. The planning permission changed the
prominence of the petrol station which would have an adverse affect on the
sales rate. Esso made no amendments to the estimate. The rent under the
tenancy was also based on the erroneous estimate. Consequently it became
impossible for Mr Mardon to run the petrol station profitably. In fact, despite
Oscar Chess Ltd v Williams [1957] 1 WLR 370 Court of Appeal

In deciding whether a statement amounts to a term or representation the
courts look at four factors:
1.The parole evidence rule
Where the contract has been put into writing only the terms included in the
written document are terms any verbal statements will be representations.
2.Relative expertise of the parties
Relative expertise:
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 Productions v Harold Smith Motors

[1965] 1 WLR 623 Court of Appeal
Contractual term or representation
Relative expertise:
If the representor has the greater knowledge, it is
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
Bannerman v White (1861) 10

CBNS 844
The claimant agreed by contract to purchase some hops to be used for

making beer. He asked the seller if the hops had been treated with sulphur
and told him if they had he wouldn't buy them as he would not be able to use
them for making beer if they had. The seller assured him that the hops had not
been treated with sulphur. In fact they had been treated with sulphur.
Routledge v Mackay [1954] 1 WLR

615 Court of Appeal
Timing
The claimant acquired a Douglas BSA motorcycle and sidecar by exchanging

another motorcycle and paying 30. The registration documents stated that it
was a 1942 model and this is what the defendant stated the year of the
motorcycle to be when the claimant cam to look at it. The motorcycle was in
fact a 1936 model but had been modified and re-registered by a previous
owner. The purchaser went away to think about it and then returned a few
days later a written agreement was produced to the effect of the exchange
which ended with the words "It is understood that when the 30 is paid over
Poussard v Spiers (1876) 1 QBD 410

Conditions
A condition is a major term of the
contract which goes to the root of the
Madame Poussard entered a contract to perform as an opera singer for three

months. She became ill five days before the opening night and was not able to
perform the first four nights. Spiers then replaced her with another opera
singer.
Bettini v Gye (1876) QBD 183

Warranties
Warranties are minor terms of a
contract which are not central to the
Bettini agreed by contract to perform as an opera singer for a three month

period. He became ill and missed 6 days of rehearsals. The employer sacked
him and replaced him with another opera singer.
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

Hong Kong Fir Shipping v Kawasaki Kisen Kaisha [1962] 2 QB 26 Court of

A ship was chartered to the defendants for a 2 year period. The agreement
Appeal
included a term that the ship would be seaworthy throughout the period of
Innominate terms
hire. The problems developed with the engine of the ship and the engine crew
The innominate term approach was established in the case of Hong Kong Fir
were incompetent. Consequently the ship was out of service for a 5 week
Shipping. Rather than classifying the terms themselves as conditions or
period and then a further 15 week period. The defendants treated this as a
warranties, the innominate term approach looks to the effect of the breach and breach of condition and ended the contract. The claimants brought an action
questions whether the innocent party to the breach was deprived of
for wrongful repudiation arguing the term relating to seaworthiness was not a
substantially the whole benefit of the contract. Only where the innocent party
condition of the contract.
Schuler v Wickman Tools [1974] AC

235 House of Lords
Even where the parties have
themselves classified the term as a
Schuler were manufacturers of certain tools and Wickman were a sales

company granted the sole right to sell certain tools manufactured by Schuler.
A term of the contract between the parties was described in the contract as
being a condition and provided that Wickman would send a sales person to
each named company once a week to solicit sales. This imposed an obligation
to make 1,400 visits in total. Wickman failed to make some of the visits and
Schuler terminated the contract for breach of condition.
Lombard North Central v Butterworth

[1987] QB 527
Even where the parties have
themselves classified the term as a
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 Mihalis Angelos [1970] 3 WLR

601
The need for certainty in
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
Bunge Corporation v Tradax

[1981] 1 WLR 711 House of Lords
The need for certainty in
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
Hutton v Warren [1836] EWHC Exch J61

Terms implied by common law
The courts are reluctant to imply terms in to a contract at common law. It is the
parties' role to agree the terms of their particular agreement. It is generally not
considered to be the role of the courts to rewrite a contract for the parties.
Freedom of contract prevails. There are limited circumstances where the
courts will imply a term into a contract at common law:
Terms implied through custom
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.
The Moorcock (1889) 14 PD 64

The courts are reluctant to imply terms in to a contract at common law. It is the
Terms implied in fact
The business efficacy test:
Shirlaw v Southern Foundries [1939] 2 KB 206 Court of Appeal

Terms implied in fact
Terms implied as fact are based on the imputed intention of the parties. Two
tests have developed:
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.
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

Liverpool City Council v Irwin [1977] AC 239 House of Lords

Liverpool city council owned a block of flats in which the defendant was a
tenant. The common parts of the flats, the lifts, stair cases, rubbish chutes etc,
The courts are reluctant to imply terms in to a contract at common law. It is the had fallen into disrepair. A rent strike was implemented by many of the tenants
including the defendant. The council sought to evict the defendant for non
payment of rent and she counter claimed for breach of an obligation to repair.
However, the tenancy agreement did not mention any obligation to repair. In
fact the tenancy agreement only imposed obligations on the tenant with no
Terms implied in law
mention of the obligations of the landlord. The defendant asked the court to
Wilson v Best Travel [1993] 1 All ER

353
Terms implied in law
In addition to being a contract of a
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.
Rowland v Divall [1923] 2 KB 500

S. 12 implied terms as to title
S. 12 applies to all contracts for sale of goods so it will cover private sales in
addition to where goods have been purchased from a shop or other business.
S.12(1) implies a term that the seller has the right to sell the goods. This
covers situations where the seller is selling stolen goods (whether the actual
thief or a subsequent sale in the chain). This term is a condition in all sales.
A buyer who treats the contract as repudiated is entitled to return of the full
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.
Niblett v Confectioners' Material [1921]

3 KB 387 Court of Appeal
In addition to applying to stolen goods
s.12(1) also applies where the seller
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:
Microbeads v Vinhurst Road Markings

[1975] 1 WLR
S.12 (2)(b) implies a term that the
purchaser will enjoy quiet possession
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.
Harlington & Leinster v Christopher Hull Fine Art [1991] 1 QB 564

S.13 sale by description
s.13(1) provides that where there is a contract for the sale of goods by
description, there is an implied term that the goods will correspond with the
description.
This section applies where the sale is solely by description. If the buyer sees
the actual goods before the sale then s.13 can not be relied upon:
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
Arcos v Ranaason [1933] AC 470

House of Lords
s.13(1) provides that where there is a
Re Moore & Landauer [1921] 2 KB 519
Court of Appeal
s.13(1) provides that where there is a
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

Stevenson v Rogers [1999] 1 All ER 613 Court of

Appeal
S. 14 Implied term as to quality
S.14 only applies where the seller sells goods in the
course of a business. It therefore does not apply to
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.
Shine v General Guarantee Corp [1988] 1 All ER 911

Liability under s.14 is strict and not dependant of proof of fault on the part of
the seller.
The relevant parts of s.14 are as follows:
(2) Where the seller sells goods in the course of a business, there is an
implied term that the goods supplied under the contract are of satisfactory
quality.
(2A) For the purposes of this Act, goods are of satisfactory quality if they meet
The Acceptability Test Applies to consumer transactions

The acceptability test looks at whether a reasonable purchaser would have
accepted the goods at the same price had they known of the defect:
The claimant purchased a second hand sports car from a car dealer. The car
gave him constant problems and he then discovered that the car had
previously been in an accident and had been totally submerged in water. The
claimant brought an action under s.14(2).
Aswan Engineering v Lupdine [1987] 1 All ER 135 Court of Appeal

Liability under s.14 is strict and not dependant of proof of fault on the part of
the seller.
The relevant parts of s.14 are as follows:
(2) Where the seller sells goods in the course of a business, there is an
implied term that the goods supplied under the contract are of satisfactory
quality.
(2A) For the purposes of this Act, goods are of satisfactory quality if they meet
The claimants purchased some liquid waterproofing from the defendant which
was contained in some heavy duty plastic pails. The pails were described as
Bartlett v Sidney Marcus ltd [1965] 1 WLR 1013 Court of Appeal

S.14 (2C) provides certain limitations to the application of s.14(2) as follows:
(2C) The term implied by subsection (2) above does not extend to any matter
making the quality of goods unsatisfactory
(a) which is specifically drawn to the buyer's attention before the contract is
made:
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.
Olley v Marlborough Court [1949] 1 KB 532

Protection at common law
Protection at common law comes in two forms. Firstly, the courts will consider
if the term has been incorporated into the contract. Secondly, the courts will
consider if the clause covers the loss in question.
Incorporation of unfair terms
The general rule is that the term must be brought to the attention of the
contracting party before or at the time the contract was made. If the term was
The Usability Test Applies to business to business transactions

The usability test is less generous than the acceptability test. This test
requires the court to consider if a reasonable purchaser could have used the
goods for purposes for which the goods were commonly supplied:
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.
Thornton v Shoe Lane Parking [1971] 2 WLR 585 Court of Appeal

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
L'Estange v Graucob [1934] 2 KB 394 Court of Appeal
1. Incorporation of unfair terms
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.
Curtis v Chemical Cleaning [1951] 1 KB 805 Court of Appeal

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

Thompson v London, Midland and Scotland Railway Co [1930] 1 KB 41 Court

of Appeal
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
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)

CONTRACT LAW CASES Complete Set Small PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

CONTRACT LAW CASES Complete Set Small PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Flashcard Set Title: "CONTRACT LAW CASES - complete set"

Study this set online at: http://www.flashcardexchange.com/cards/contract-law-cases-complete-set-2521514

Harvey v Facey [1893] UKPC 1

Fisher v Bell [1961] 1 QB 394

Partridge v Crittenden (1968) 2 All

Spencer v Harding Law Rep. 5 C. P. 561

The defendants advertised a sale by tender of the stock in trade belonging

Heathcote Ball v Barry [2000] EWCA Civ 235

Thornton v Shoe Lane Parking [1971]

Flashcard Set Title: "CONTRACT LAW CASES - complete set"

Ramsgate Victoria Hotel v Montefoire (1866) LR 1 Ex 109

The defendant offered to purchase shares in the claimant company at a

Dickinson v Dodds (1876) 2 Ch D 463

Errington v Errington Woods [1952] 1 KB 290 Court

Dahlia v Four Millbank Nominees [1978] Ch 231

Hyde v Wrench (1840) 49 ER 132 Chancery

A counter offer is where an offeree responds to an

Entorres v Miles Far East [1955] 2 QB 327 Court of Appeal

Felthouse v Bindley [1862] EWHC CP

A nephew discussed buying a horse from his uncle. He offered to purchase

Brogden v Metropolitan Railway

Flashcard Set Title: "CONTRACT LAW CASES - complete set"

Butler Machine Tool v Ex-Cell-O

Ex-Cell-O wished to purchase a machine from Butler. Butler sent out a

Adams v Lindsell (1818) 106 ER 250

Where it is agreed that the parties will use the post

Scammell and Nephew v Ouston

The parties entered an agreement whereby Scammell were to supply a van

Sudbrook Trading Estate v Eggleton

Jones v Padavatton [1969] 1 WLR 328

Balfour v Balfour [1919] 2 KB 571

A husband worked overseas and agreed to send maintenance payments to

Errington v Errington Woods [1952] 1 KB 290 Court

Flashcard Set Title: "CONTRACT LAW CASES - complete set"

Merritt v Merritt [1970] 1 WLR 1211 Court of Appeal

Simpkins v Pays [1955] 1 WLR 975 Queen's Bench

A Grandmother, granddaughter and a lodger entered into a weekly

Esso Petroleum v Customs & Excise [1976] 1 WLR 1 House of Lords

Where an agreement is made in a commercial context, the law raises a

Edwards v Skyways [1964] 1 WLR 349 Court of

Rose & Frank Co v Crompton Bros [1925] AC 445 House of Lords

Ferrera v Littlewoods Pools [1998] EWCA Civ 618

Kleinwort Benson (KB) v Malaysia Mining

Coward v MIB [1963] 1 QB 359 Court of Appeal

Flashcard Set Title: "CONTRACT LAW CASES - complete set"

Albert v MIB [1971] 3WLR 291 House of Lords

A docker was killed in a road collision on his way to work. He was a

In contract law consideration is

Consideration must be something of value in the eyes of the law - (Thomas v

1. The consideration must not be past.

Re McArdle (1951) Ch 669 Court

Majorie McArdle carried out certain improvements and repairs on a bungalow.

Lampleigh v Braithwaite [1615] EWHC

Chappel v Nestle [1960] AC 87 House of Lords

Nestle ran a sales promotion whereby if persons sent in 3 chocolate bar

Tweddle v Atkinson [1861] EWHC QB

Collins v Godefrey (1831) 1 B & Ad

The claimant, Collins, had been subpoenaed to attend court as a witness in

Flashcard Set Title: "CONTRACT LAW CASES - complete set"

Glasbrook Bros v Glamorgan County Council [1925]

The defendant owners of a colliery asked the police to provide protection

Ward v Byham [1956] 1 WLR 496

Stilk v Myrick [1809] EWHC KB J58