Blacklock & Macarthur, Ltd v. Kirk [1918] ScotLR 84 (13 November 1918)

Blacklock & Macarthur, Ltd v. Kirk [1918] ScotLR 84 (13 November 1918)

The supplier was in breach of contract for failing to deliver the full quantity of putty required for the defender's bona fide business in 1915, as 'usual requirements' referred to the actual needs of the business, and the supplier failed to prove that war or other exceptional cause made performance impossible or substantially impeded.

Citation
[1918] ScotLR 84
Parties
Pursuer: Blacklock & Macarthur, Limited; Defender: George G. Kirk
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
13 November 1918
Procedural Posture
Contract Dispute / Appeal From Sheriff Court to Court of Session Inner House
Outcome
Appeal sustained; interlocutor of Sheriff-Substitute recalled; supplier found in breach of contract and liable in damages; set-off of sums due resulting in net decree for pursuers.
Legal Topics
Construction of Contract Terms, Force Majeure, Course of Dealing, Supply Contracts, Damages for Breach of Contract
Contract Law Commercial Law Construction of Contract Terms Force Majeure Course of Dealing Supply Contracts Damages for Breach of Contract

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Blacklock & Macarthur, Limited

Pursuer

George G. Kirk

Defender

Procedural Posture

Contract Dispute / Appeal From Sheriff Court to Court of Session Inner House

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Meaning of 'usual requirements' in a supply contract
  2. 2 Whether the supplier was excused from performance by force majeure (war or other exceptional cause)
  3. 3 Entitlement to damages for short delivery

Ratio Decidendi

The supplier was in breach of contract for failing to deliver the full quantity of putty required for the defender's bona fide business in 1915, as 'usual requirements' referred to the actual needs of the business, and the supplier failed to prove that war or other exceptional cause made performance impossible or substantially impeded.

Court Disposition

Appeal sustained; interlocutor of Sheriff-Substitute recalled; supplier found in breach of contract and liable in damages; set-off of sums due resulting in net decree for pursuers.

Orders

  • Supplier to pay defender damages of £234, 3s. 11d. for breach of contract.
  • Defender to pay pursuers £260, 11s. 9d. for goods supplied.