Thomson v. Dyment

Thomson v. Dyment

Majority held that shipments substantially complied with the contract and the deficiency in quality was minimal (~4.5%); therefore the buyer had no right to reject the delivered carloads and his sole remedy was a reduction in price or damages; appeal dismissed.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
(1886) 13 SCR 303
Parties
Defendant Appellant: Robert Thomson; Plaintiff Respondent: Nathaniel Dyment
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
8 November 1886
Procedural Posture
Contract Sale of Goods / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Court of Appeal for Ontario
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs; judgment for plaintiff affirmed
Legal Topics
Right to Reject Goods, Acceptance of Part, Place of Delivery, Inspection of Goods, Remedies for Breach
Source Language
english
Contract Sales Right to Reject Goods Acceptance of Part Place of Delivery Inspection of Goods Remedies for Breach

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

Parties

Robert Thomson

Defendant Appellant

Nathaniel Dyment

Plaintiff Respondent

Procedural Posture

Contract Sale of Goods / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Court of Appeal for Ontario

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether buyer who accepts part of a shipment may reject other carloads for minor non‑conformity
  2. 2 Whether inspection must be made at vendor's mill/on board cars or may be made at destination where no place of delivery was specified
  3. 3 Whether substantial compliance with contractual description precludes rejection and limits remedy to price reduction or damages

Ratio Decidendi

Majority held that shipments substantially complied with the contract and the deficiency in quality was minimal (~4.5%); therefore the buyer had no right to reject the delivered carloads and his sole remedy was a reduction in price or damages; appeal dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs; judgment for plaintiff affirmed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs
  • Verdict for plaintiff for contract price affirmed, less abatement previously allowed