Raffles v Wichelhaus: Difference between revisions
Lost Student (talk | contribs) (Created page with "'''Facts''': Plaintiff offered to sell a certain amount of cotton to Defendant. The cotton would be brought from India on a ship called the Peerless. There were apparently two sh...") |
Lost Student (talk | contribs) mNo edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
''Raffles v. Wichelhaus'', 2 Hurl. & C. 906 (Court of Exchequer 1864). | |||
'''Facts''': Plaintiff offered to sell a certain amount of cotton to Defendant. The cotton would be brought from India on a ship called the Peerless. There were apparently two ships with that name, and the Defendant and the Plaintiff were each thinking about different ones. One was supposed to leave from Bombay in October, and the other was supposed to leave in December. When the cotton arrived in England, the Defendant refused to pay. The ship that he was expecting to bring him the cotton had left India in October. | '''Facts''': Plaintiff offered to sell a certain amount of cotton to Defendant. The cotton would be brought from India on a ship called the Peerless. There were apparently two ships with that name, and the Defendant and the Plaintiff were each thinking about different ones. One was supposed to leave from Bombay in October, and the other was supposed to leave in December. When the cotton arrived in England, the Defendant refused to pay. The ship that he was expecting to bring him the cotton had left India in October. | ||
Revision as of 16:03, October 20, 2011
Raffles v. Wichelhaus, 2 Hurl. & C. 906 (Court of Exchequer 1864).
Facts: Plaintiff offered to sell a certain amount of cotton to Defendant. The cotton would be brought from India on a ship called the Peerless. There were apparently two ships with that name, and the Defendant and the Plaintiff were each thinking about different ones. One was supposed to leave from Bombay in October, and the other was supposed to leave in December. When the cotton arrived in England, the Defendant refused to pay. The ship that he was expecting to bring him the cotton had left India in October.
Issue: Should the contract be enforced?
Holding: The contract is not enforceable.
Reasons: Each person was agreeing to a different thing. The intent of every party was not what the other party thought. There was no meeting of the minds.
Judgment: Judgment for the Defendant.
