Marks Brothers v Park [1914] HCA 22

Marks Brothers v Park [1914] HCA 22

The oral and written agreements were construed as relating only to the manufacture and sale of the patented machine and any improvements within the Commonwealth and New Zealand, and the 10 per cent profit or sale entitlement was limited to such rights and only during the plaintiff’s employment by the defendants. The written agreement was held to be a single contract; sale of the relevant patent rights and related entitlements were also strictly limited to the same extent and term.

Parties
Appellant: Marks Brothers; Appellant: Horace Marks; Appellant: Walter David Marks; Respondent: Richard Thomas Park
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 April 1914
Procedural Posture
Appeal / On Appeal From the Supreme Court of Victoria
Outcome
appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Construction of Contract, Contract for Services, Remuneration by Profit Share, Oral and Written Contract Interpretation
Contract Law Construction of Contract Contract for Services Remuneration by Profit Share Oral and Written Contract Interpretation

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Marks Brothers

Appellant

Horace Marks

Appellant

Walter David Marks

Appellant

Richard Thomas Park

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / On Appeal From the Supreme Court of Victoria

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What was the subject matter and scope of the oral and written contracts between plaintiff and defendants?
  2. 2 Did the relevant contract(s) relate only to Commonwealth and New Zealand patent rights and profits, or apply internationally?
  3. 3 Was the written contract single and entire, or two distinct agreements?

Ratio Decidendi

The oral and written agreements were construed as relating only to the manufacture and sale of the patented machine and any improvements within the Commonwealth and New Zealand, and the 10 per cent profit or sale entitlement was limited to such rights and only during the plaintiff’s employment by the defendants. The written agreement was held to be a single contract; sale of the relevant patent rights and related entitlements were also strictly limited to the same extent and term.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed

Orders

  • Judgment appealed from discharged.
  • Declarations substituted as set out in the judgment of Griffith CJ regarding the scope, extent and duration of the contracts and entitlements.