F H Bertling Ltd v Tube Developments Ltd [1998] ScotCS 42 (30 October 1998)

F H Bertling Ltd v Tube Developments Ltd [1998] ScotCS 42 (30 October 1998)

There was no contract, express or implied, nor any agency relationship constituted between Tube Developments Limited and F. H. Bertling Limited obliging Tube to reimburse Bertling for transportation costs. Bertling acted throughout on the instructions of Oil & Gas, its principal, and Tube's communication did not amount to an offer or instruction to assume liability for such costs.

Citation
[1998] ScotCS 42
Parties
Pursuer: F. H. Bertling Limited; Defender: Tube Developments Limited
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
30 October 1998
Procedural Posture
Commercial Contract Dispute / Judgment After Proof (trial)
Outcome
Action dismissed; defenders assoilzied (absolved) from the conclusion of the summons.
Legal Topics
Freight Forwarding, Letters of Credit, Implied Contract, Agency Relationship, Reimbursement of Expenses
Commercial Law Contract Law Agency Law Freight Forwarding Letters of Credit Implied Contract Agency Relationship Reimbursement of Expenses

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

F. H. Bertling Limited

Pursuer

Tube Developments Limited

Defender

Procedural Posture

Commercial Contract Dispute / Judgment After Proof (trial)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Tube Developments Limited is contractually obliged to reimburse F. H. Bertling Limited for transportation costs incurred in shipping steel pipes from the UK to Saudi Arabia.
  2. 2 Whether an agency relationship or implied contract existed between Tube Developments Limited and F. H. Bertling Limited obliging Tube to pay Bertling's costs.

Ratio Decidendi

There was no contract, express or implied, nor any agency relationship constituted between Tube Developments Limited and F. H. Bertling Limited obliging Tube to reimburse Bertling for transportation costs. Bertling acted throughout on the instructions of Oil & Gas, its principal, and Tube's communication did not amount to an offer or instruction to assume liability for such costs.

Court Disposition

Action dismissed; defenders assoilzied (absolved) from the conclusion of the summons.

Orders

  • Repel the pleas-in-law for the pursuers.
  • Sustain the third plea-in-law for the defenders.