Filobake Ltd v Rondo Ltd & Anor

Filobake Ltd v Rondo Ltd & Anor

The only contractual obligations owed by Rondo were to supply equipment of satisfactory quality and reasonably fit for the purpose of delivering the stated performance in the contract. There was no express or implied term requiring the equipment to produce samosa pastry to a specific recipe or moisture content, nor any obligation regarding the Oven and Cooler supplied by Frampton. The Oven supplied by Frampton had a minor defect in the belt tensioning device causing fraying of the conveyor belt, but this did not entitle Filobake to reject the goods and only warranted nominal damages. No duties of care in tort arose beyond the contractual obligations. Filobake failed to prove any...

Parties
Claimant: Filobake Limited; First Defendant: Rondo Limited; Second Defendant: Frampton International Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
21 April 2004
Procedural Posture
Commercial Contract Dispute / Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Claim against Rondo dismissed; claim against Frampton succeeds for nominal damages only.
Legal Topics
Implied Terms, Fitness for Purpose, Satisfactory Quality, Rejection of Goods, Damages, Tort of Negligence
Contract Law Sale of Goods Implied Terms Fitness for Purpose Satisfactory Quality Rejection of Goods Damages Tort of Negligence

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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Filobake Limited

Claimant

Rondo Limited

First Defendant

Frampton International Limited

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Contract Dispute / Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the equipment supplied by Rondo and Frampton was of satisfactory quality and fit for purpose under the Sale of Goods Act 1979.
  2. 2 Whether Rondo owed Filobake duties of care in tort regarding the oven and cooler supplied by Frampton.
  3. 3 Whether Filobake was entitled to reject the equipment and claim damages, including loss of profits and wasted expenditure.

Ratio Decidendi

The only contractual obligations owed by Rondo were to supply equipment of satisfactory quality and reasonably fit for the purpose of delivering the stated performance in the contract. There was no express or implied term requiring the equipment to produce samosa pastry to a specific recipe or moisture content, nor any obligation regarding the Oven and Cooler supplied by Frampton. The Oven supplied by Frampton had a minor defect in the belt tensioning device causing fraying of the conveyor belt, but this did not entitle Filobake to reject the goods and only warranted nominal damages. No duties of care in tort arose beyond the contractual obligations. Filobake failed to prove any...

Court Disposition

Claim against Rondo dismissed; claim against Frampton succeeds for nominal damages only.

Orders

  • Claim against Rondo Limited dismissed.
  • Claim against Frampton International Limited succeeds for nominal damages of £2.