Henry Kendall Ltd v William Lillico Ltd

Last updated

Henry Kendall Ltd v William Lillico Ltd
CourtHouse of Lords
Citation(s)[1969] 2 AC 31
Transcript(s)
Court membership
Judge(s) sitting Lord Reid, Lord Morris of Borth-y-Gest, Lord Guest, Lord Pearce, Lord Wilberforce
Keywords
Incorporation

Henry Kendall Ltd v William Lillico Ltd [1969] 2 AC 31 is an English contract law case concerning the incorporation of contract terms through a course of dealings.

Contents

Facts

Animal food was sold by merchants to a farmer. It was defective. The merchants brought in suppliers, and they in turn brought in their suppliers, a long chain. (hence also Hardwick Game v Suffolk Agricultural Poultry Producers Association ). Purchases three or four times a month had happened for three or so years, and each time, a sold note followed, which said the buyer took responsibility for any latent defects. The buyers had never read the note.

Judgment

The House of Lords held that a reasonable seller in the circumstances would have had good cause to assume that the buyer agreed to the term, hence rejecting Lord Devlin’s McCutcheon dicta that previous dealings needed to prove actual knowledge.

See also

Notes

    Related Research Articles

    <span class="mw-page-title-main">Just price</span>

    The just price is a theory of ethics in economics that attempts to set standards of fairness in transactions. With intellectual roots in ancient Greek philosophy, it was advanced by Thomas Aquinas based on an argument against usury, which in his time referred to the making of any rate of interest on loans. It gave rise to the contractual principle of laesio enormis.

    Caveat emptor is Latin for "Let the buyer beware". It has become a proverb in English. Generally, caveat emptor is the contract law principle that controls the sale of real property after the date of closing, but may also apply to sales of other goods. The phrase caveat emptor and its use as a disclaimer of warranties arises from the fact that buyers typically have less information than the seller about the good or service they are purchasing. This quality of the situation is known as 'information asymmetry'. Defects in the good or service may be hidden from the buyer, and only known to the seller.

    <span class="mw-page-title-main">Letter of credit</span> Document issued by a financial institution

    A letter of credit (LC), also known as a documentary credit or bankers commercial credit, or letter of undertaking (LoU), is a payment mechanism used in international trade to provide an economic guarantee from a creditworthy bank to an exporter of goods. Letters of credit are used extensively in the financing of international trade, when the reliability of contracting parties cannot be readily and easily determined. Its economic effect is to introduce a bank as an underwriter that assumes the counterparty risk of the buyer paying the seller for goods.

    In contract law, a warranty is a contractual assurance given by a seller to a buyer, for example confirming that the seller is the owner of the property being sold. A warranty is a term of a contract, but not usually a condition of the contract or an innominate term, meaning that it is a term "not going to the root of the contract", and therefore only entitles the innocent party to damages if it is breached, i.e. if the warranty is not true or the defaulting party does not perform the contract in accordance with the terms of the warranty. A warranty is not a guarantee: it is a mere promise. It may be enforced if it is breached by an award for the legal remedy of damages.

    In Economics and Law, exclusive dealing arises when a supplier entails the buyer by placing limitations on the rights of the buyer to choose what, who and where they deal. This is against the law in most countries which include the USA, Australia and Europe when it has a significant impact of substantially lessening the competition in an industry. When the sales outlets are owned by the supplier, exclusive dealing is because of vertical integration, where the outlets are independent exclusive dealing is illegal due to the Restrictive Trade Practices Act, however, if it is registered and approved it is allowed. While primarily those agreements imposed by sellers are concerned with the comprehensive literature on exclusive dealing, some exclusive dealing arrangements are imposed by buyers instead of sellers.

    <i>Smith v Hughes</i> English contract law case

    Smith v Hughes (1871) LR 6 QB 597 is an English contract law case. In it, Blackburn J set out his classic statement of the objective interpretation of people's conduct when entering into a contract. The case regarded a mistake made by Mr. Hughes, a horse trainer, who bought a quantity of oats that were the same as a sample he had been shown. However, Hughes had misidentified the kind of oats: his horse could not eat them, and refused to pay for them. Smith, the oat supplier, sued for Hughes to complete the sale as agreed. The court sided with Smith, as he provided the oats Hughes agreed to buy. That Hughes made a mistake was his own fault, as he had not been misled by Smith. Since Smith had made no fault, there was no mutual mistake, and the sale contract was still valid.

    <span class="mw-page-title-main">Magnuson–Moss Warranty Act</span> United States federal law governing warranties on consumer products

    The Magnuson–Moss Warranty Act is a United States federal law. Enacted in 1975, the federal statute governs warranties on consumer products. The law does not require any product to have a warranty, but if it does have a warranty, the warranty must comply with this law. The law was created to fix problems as a result of manufacturers using disclaimers on warranties in an unfair or misleading manner.

    <i>Butler Machine Tool Co Ltd v Ex-Cell-O Corp (England) Ltd</i> 1977 Court of Appeal case involving contract formation and standard forms

    Butler Machine Tool Co Ltd v Ex-Cell-O Corp (England) Ltd [1977] EWCA Civ 9 is a leading English contract law case. It concerns the problem found among some large businesses, with each side attempting to get their preferred standard form agreements to be the basis for a contract.

    <span class="mw-page-title-main">Sale of Goods Act 1979</span> United Kingdom legislation

    The Sale of Goods Act 1979 is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom which regulated English contract law and UK commercial law in respect of goods that are sold and bought. The Act consolidated the original Sale of Goods Act 1893 and subsequent legislation, which in turn had codified and consolidated the law. Since 1979, there have been numerous minor statutory amendments and additions to the 1979 Act. It was replaced for some aspects of consumer contracts from 1 October 2015 by the Consumer Rights Act 2015 but remains the primary legislation underpinning business-to-business transactions involving selling or buying goods.

    <span class="mw-page-title-main">English contract law</span> Law of contracts in England and Wales

    English contract law is the body of law that regulates legally binding agreements in England and Wales. With its roots in the lex mercatoria and the activism of the judiciary during the industrial revolution, it shares a heritage with countries across the Commonwealth, from membership in the European Union, continuing membership in Unidroit, and to a lesser extent the United States. Any agreement that is enforceable in court is a contract. A contract is a voluntary obligation, contrasting to the duty to not violate others rights in tort or unjust enrichment. English law places a high value on ensuring people have truly consented to the deals that bind them in court, so long as they comply with statutory and human rights.

    The law of mistake comprises a group of separate rules in English contract law. If the law deems a mistake to be sufficiently grave, then a contract entered into on the grounds of the mistake may be void. A mistake is an incorrect understanding by one or more parties to a contract. There are essentially three types of mistakes in contract,

    <i>Shogun Finance Ltd v Hudson</i>

    Shogun Finance Ltd v Hudson [2003] UKHL 62 is an English contract law case decided in the House of Lords, on the subject of mistaken identity as a basis for rescission of a contract. The case has been the subject of much criticism in failing to effectively clarify the area of mistake to identity.

    <i>Hollier v Rambler Motors (AMC) Ltd</i>

    Hollier v Rambler Motors (AMC) Ltd[1971] EWCA Civ 12 is an English contract law case, concerning the incorporation of terms into a contract and the contra proferentum rule of interpretation. It shows an example of a very hostile interpretation of exclusion clauses.

    <span class="mw-page-title-main">United States contract law</span>

    Contract law regulates the obligations established by agreement, whether express or implied, between private parties in the United States. The law of contracts varies from state to state; there is nationwide federal contract law in certain areas, such as contracts entered into pursuant to Federal Reclamation Law.

    <i>Frederick E Rose (London) Ltd v William H Pim Junior & Co Ltd</i>

    Frederick E Rose (London) Ltd v William H Pim Junior & Co Ltd[1953] 2 QB 450 is an English contract law case concerning the rectification of contractual documents and the interpretation of contracts in English law.

    <i>Phillips v Brooks Ltd</i> English contract law case

    Phillips v Brooks Ltd [1919] 2 KB 243 is an English contract law case concerning mistake. It held that a person is deemed to contract with the person in front of them unless they can substantially prove that they instead intended to deal with someone else.

    <span class="mw-page-title-main">Supply of Goods (Implied Terms) Act 1973</span> United Kingdom legislation

    The Supply of Goods Act 1973 was an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom that provided implied terms in contracts for the supply of goods and for hire-purchase agreements, and limited the use of exclusion clauses. The result of a joint report by the England and Wales Law Commission and the Scottish Law Commission, First Report on Exemption Clauses, the Act was granted royal assent on 18 April 1973 and came into force a month later. It met with a mixed reaction from academics, who praised the additional protection it offered while at the same time questioning whether it was enough; several aspects of the Act's draftsmanship and implementation were also called into question. Much of the Act was repealed by the Sale of Goods Act 1979, which included many of the 1973 Act's provisions.

    <i>McCutcheon v David MacBrayne Ltd</i>

    McCutcheon v David MacBrayne Ltd [1964] 1 WLR 125 is a Scottish contract law case, concerning the incorporation of a term through a course of dealings.

    British Crane Hire Corporation Ltd v Ipswich Plant Hire Ltd [1973] EWCA Civ 6 is an English contract law case concerning the issue of incorporation of terms with regular business dealings.

    The South African law of sale is an area of the legal system in that country that describes rules applicable to a contract of sale, generally described as a contract whereby one person agrees to deliver to another the free possession of a thing in return for a price in money.

    References