Thompson & Alix Ltd. v. Smith

Thompson & Alix Ltd. v. Smith

Buyer’s rejection of the first car (which the jury found equal to Grade A) was at most a severable breach for which buyer was liable in damages for that car and did not demonstrate an intention to abandon the whole contract; the second car was not ordered and lacked the required certificate so buyer was not obliged to accept it; defendant’s refusal to ship further constituted repudiation by defendant and plaintiff entitled to recover the measured damages of $3,290.

Citation
[1933] SCR 172
Parties
Plaintiff/appellant: Thompson & Alix Ltd.; Defendant/respondent: B. F. Smith
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
7 February 1933
Procedural Posture
Contract (sale of Goods) / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Supreme Court of New Brunswick, Appeal Division After Two Trials and an Order for a New Trial; Parties Requested Final Determination
Outcome
Appeal allowed; cross-appeal dismissed; judgment entered for plaintiff (Thompson & Alix Ltd.).
Legal Topics
Repudiation, Instalment Deliveries, Breach of Contract, Damages, Waiver, Interpretation of Contract, Evidentiary Sufficiency
Source Language
English
Contract Sale of Goods Commercial Law Repudiation Instalment Deliveries Breach of Contract Damages Waiver +2 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Thompson & Alix Ltd.

Plaintiff/appellant

B. F. Smith

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Contract (sale of Goods) / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Supreme Court of New Brunswick, Appeal Division After Two Trials and an Order for a New Trial; Parties Requested Final Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Were the two cars shipped in September shipped on account of (under) the written contract?
  2. 2 Did the buyer’s rejection of those carloads constitute a repudiation of the entire instalment contract?
  3. 3 Was the buyer entitled to reject uncertified shipments prior to October and had the buyer waived the certificate requirement?

Ratio Decidendi

Buyer’s rejection of the first car (which the jury found equal to Grade A) was at most a severable breach for which buyer was liable in damages for that car and did not demonstrate an intention to abandon the whole contract; the second car was not ordered and lacked the required certificate so buyer was not obliged to accept it; defendant’s refusal to ship further constituted repudiation by defendant and plaintiff entitled to recover the measured damages of $3,290.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; cross-appeal dismissed; judgment entered for plaintiff (Thompson & Alix Ltd.).

Orders

  • Judgment entered for Thompson & Alix Ltd. against B. F. Smith for $3,290 with costs throughout.
  • Appeal allowed and cross-appeal dismissed; trial court judgment restored awarding damages to plaintiff.