Glen Clyde Whisky Ltd v Campbell Meyer & Company Ltd [2015] ScotCS CSOH_97 (22 July 2015)

Glen Clyde Whisky Ltd v Campbell Meyer & Company Ltd [2015] ScotCS CSOH_97 (22 July 2015)

The defender was in material breach of contract by failing to deliver goods that had been paid for and by supplying a significant quantity of Glen Clyde Whisky with defective labels, rendering them not of satisfactory quality. The pursuer was in breach by cancelling a SWIFT payment without notice, but this was not a material breach entitling the defender to rescind. The mutuality principle did not entitle either party to withhold performance under distinct contracts. Damages were awarded for the cost of remedying defective goods and for the return of the price of undelivered goods.

Citation
[2015] ScotCS CSOH_97
Parties
Pursuer: Glen Clyde Whisky Limited; Defender: Campbell Meyer & Company Limited
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
22 July 2015
Procedural Posture
Commercial Action (breach of Contract) / Judgment After Proof Before Answer
Outcome
Judgment for the pursuer in part; damages and repetition awarded; counterclaim dismissed.
Legal Topics
Sale of Goods, Implied Terms, Material Breach, Remedies for Breach, Quality of Goods, Mutuality of Contractual Obligations
Contract Law Commercial Law Sale of Goods Implied Terms Material Breach Remedies for Breach Quality of Goods Mutuality of Contractual Obligations

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 4 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Glen Clyde Whisky Limited

Pursuer

Campbell Meyer & Company Limited

Defender

Procedural Posture

Commercial Action (breach of Contract) / Judgment After Proof Before Answer

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defender was in breach of contract by failing to deliver paid-for goods and by supplying goods not of satisfactory quality
  2. 2 Whether the pursuer was in breach of contract by failing to pay for certain goods and by cancelling a SWIFT payment without notice
  3. 3 Whether either party was entitled to withhold performance under the mutuality principle

Ratio Decidendi

The defender was in material breach of contract by failing to deliver goods that had been paid for and by supplying a significant quantity of Glen Clyde Whisky with defective labels, rendering them not of satisfactory quality. The pursuer was in breach by cancelling a SWIFT payment without notice, but this was not a material breach entitling the defender to rescind. The mutuality principle did not entitle either party to withhold performance under distinct contracts. Damages were awarded for the cost of remedying defective goods and for the return of the price of undelivered goods.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the pursuer in part; damages and repetition awarded; counterclaim dismissed.

Orders

  • Defender to pay the pursuer the price of undelivered goods (repetition).
  • Defender to pay damages for remedial costs incurred due to defective labels.