Cutts v Buckley [1933] HCA 21

Cutts v Buckley [1933] HCA 21

No evidence existed to support the warranty count, so the general verdict cannot stand; judgment is entered for the defendant on the warranty count, and a new trial ordered on the misrepresentation count.

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Plaintiff: Sydney Shaw Buckley; Defendant: Frederick Cutts
Jurisdiction
Australia
Procedural Posture
Appeal / High Court Decision on Appeal From Supreme Court of New South Wales
Outcome
Appeal allowed; judgment of Full Court discharged.
Legal Topics
Fraudulent Misrepresentation, Breach of Warranty, Damages, Costs, General Verdict, Collateral Contract
Contract Law Tort Law Civil Procedure Fraudulent Misrepresentation Breach of Warranty Damages Costs General Verdict +1 more

Source-derived case record

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 4 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sydney Shaw Buckley

Plaintiff

Frederick Cutts

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Appeal / High Court Decision on Appeal From Supreme Court of New South Wales

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Was there evidence sufficient to support a finding of fraudulent misrepresentation?
  2. 2 Did a collateral contract of warranty exist separate to the written contract?
  3. 3 Can a general verdict stand when there are two counts and no evidence supports both?

Ratio Decidendi

No evidence existed to support the warranty count, so the general verdict cannot stand; judgment is entered for the defendant on the warranty count, and a new trial ordered on the misrepresentation count.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; judgment of Full Court discharged.

Orders

  • Verdict entered for defendant on the second (warranty) count.
  • New trial ordered on the first (misrepresentation) count only.