Mc Rae v Commonwealth Disposals Commission PDF

Preview

Summary

CONTRACT DAMAGES Mc Rae v Commonwealth Disposals Commission...

Description

7/20/2021

McRae v Commonwealth Disposals Commission

Order

Offers

Support

Notif

Disclaimer: This work was produced by one of our expert legal writers, as a lea to help law students with their studies. View full disclaimer

/ Cases Share this:



McRae v Commonwealth Disposals Commissi CLR 377 Contract Law – Australia – Common Mistake – Performance – Mistake – Subject Matter – Damages Facts The complainant, McRae, won a tender from the defendants, Commonwealth Disposals Commission, to on Jourmaund Reef near Samarai. However, when the complainant went to the location, after laying ou salvage, they discovered that in fact there was no oil tanker. The Commonwealth Disposals Commission an oil tanker there from gossip. They later learned that it was not. Issues At first instance, it was held that there was no contract between the complainant and the defendant. Ho appealed by McRae. The complainant sought damages from the defendant for breach of contract, fraud oil tanker and for damages since they did not disclose the information about the oil tanker when it cam not exist. The defendants argued that they had no liability to pay damages for breach of contract, as it w that the oil tanker did not exist. The issue in this case was whether the complainant could recover dama void by a common mistake. Held It was held that the complainant was entitled for damages from the defendant. The contract was not nu common mistake. A contract did exist between the complainant and the defendant and since this oil ta breach of contract. Thus, the complainant was entitled to damages for breach of contract and for the p tanker, as well as the expenses paid out for the salvage operation. Share this:

/ Cases

...