Raffles v Wichelhaus and Another PDF

Preview

Summary

Exams practise...

Description

Title: Raffles v Wichelhaus and Another Parties: Plaintiff – Raffles Defendant - Wichelhaus and Another Court: Supreme Court Date: Jan 20, 1864 Procedural History: The plaintiff sued the defendant for the breach of contract that the defendants refused to accept the said goods or pay the plaintiff for them. Case Facts: It was agreed between the plaintiff and defendants that the plaintiff should sell to defendants, and defendants buy of plaintiff, 125 bales of Surat cotton which arrive ex “Peerless” from Bombay. The defendants pleaded that he meant a ship called the “Peerless” which sailed from Bombay in October, but the plaintiff was only ready to deliver the cotton shipped by “Peerless”, another ship, from Bombay in December. Legal Issue: Whether the refusal of accepting the Surat Cotton of defendant was liable. Plaintiff Arguments: 1. It is immaterial by what ship the cotton was to arrive 2. The defendant has no right to contradict by parol evidence a written contract good upon the face of it. 3. Intention is of no avail, unless stated at the time of the contract. Defendant Arguments: 1. The defendant only agreed to buy cotton which was to arrive by a particular ship. Decision of Court: Judgment for the defendant. Judge’s Opinion (Singleton, J.): 1. It après that 2 ships called the “Peerless ” were about to sail from Bombay there is a latent ambiguity. 2. Parol evidence may be given for the purpose of showing that the defendant meant one “Peerless” and the plaintiff another 3. There was no consensus ad idem , therefore no binding contract, Rule of Law: Whenever there is ambiguity in the term of contract, there is no binding contract....