Brewer v Mann & Ors

Brewer v Mann & Ors

The trial judge lost objectivity and fairness, improperly imported a collateral warranty into the hire purchase contract, misapplied the law on description and damages, and made findings of dishonesty not pleaded or put to the party. The description '1930 Bentley Speed Six' does not require an original Speed Six engine; expert evidence and market understanding support this. Damages must be reduced by credit for use. The appeals of Mr Mann, SMRL, and Fortis are allowed; a retrial is ordered for Brewer's claim against Mann/SMRL, and Fortis's liability is dismissed.

Parties
Claimant / Respondent: Mercedes Travis Brewer; First Defendant / Appellant: Stanley Mann; Second Defendant / Appellant: Fortis Lease UK Limited; Third Defendant / Appellant: Stanley Mann Racing Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
07 March 2012
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeals allowed; retrial ordered for Brewer v Mann/SMRL; Brewer's claim against Fortis dismissed; Fortis's counterclaim succeeds.
Legal Topics
Collateral Warranty, Hire Purchase, Sale by Description, Implied Terms, Joinder of Parties, Damages, Credibility, Expert Evidence
Contract Law Consumer Protection Commercial Law Collateral Warranty Hire Purchase Sale by Description Implied Terms Joinder of Parties +3 more

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 5 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mercedes Travis Brewer

Claimant / Respondent

Stanley Mann

First Defendant / Appellant

Fortis Lease UK Limited

Second Defendant / Appellant

Stanley Mann Racing Limited

Third Defendant / Appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a description of '1930 Bentley Speed Six' in a hire purchase contract requires the car to have an original Speed Six engine
  2. 2 Whether a collateral warranty was given by Mr Mann regarding the engine
  3. 3 Whether Fortis was liable for breach of implied term of correspondence with description

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge lost objectivity and fairness, improperly imported a collateral warranty into the hire purchase contract, misapplied the law on description and damages, and made findings of dishonesty not pleaded or put to the party. The description '1930 Bentley Speed Six' does not require an original Speed Six engine; expert evidence and market understanding support this. Damages must be reduced by credit for use. The appeals of Mr Mann, SMRL, and Fortis are allowed; a retrial is ordered for Brewer's claim against Mann/SMRL, and Fortis's liability is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeals allowed; retrial ordered for Brewer v Mann/SMRL; Brewer's claim against Fortis dismissed; Fortis's counterclaim succeeds.

Orders

  • Retrial of Brewer's claim against Mann and SMRL
  • Dismissal of Brewer's claim against Fortis