FACTS
Mr. Hughes, a horse trainer, agreed with Mr. Smith, an oat supplier, to buy a certain amount of oats. The selection of oats was made using a sample shown to Hughes. However, due to an error in identification, Hughes later discovered that the oats delivered were not as he had thought. As his horse refused to consume them, Hughes declined to finalize the purchase, contending that the oats did not meet his expectations.
ISSUES
Whether a unilateral mistake on the part of the buyer could serve as a basis for the cancellation of the contract.
Whether the doctrine of caveat emptor (buyer beware) was relevant concerning the buyer's erroneous perception of the goods' quality.
Whether the annulment of a contract due to a buyer's mistake necessitated fraud or deceit by the seller.
JUDGMENT
The court, presided over by Blackburn J, delivered a judgment emphasizing the objective interpretation of parties’ conduct in contract formation. The court rejected the idea of a unilateral mistake being a ground for rescission. Blackburn J held that in a specific sale without express warranty, the buyer must accept the purchased item even if it lacks a particular quality, unless there is fraud or deceit by the seller.
The court reinforced the principle of caveat emptor, stating that the buyer had the responsibility to inspect and form their own judgment when purchasing a specific item. The court concluded that the contract remained binding unless the seller had committed fraud or deceit, distinguishing between a buyer’s belief or motive and an essential condition of the contract.
Comments