Duncan, Galloway & Co., Ltd v. Duncan, Falconer, & Co., Ltd [1912] ScotLR 167 (29 November 1912)

Duncan, Galloway & Co., Ltd v. Duncan, Falconer, & Co., Ltd [1912] ScotLR 167 (29 November 1912)

The pursuers are entitled to repetition of the price paid for subjects erroneously included in the sale due to the defenders' innocent misrepresentation, as the payment was made under an error of fact induced by the defenders. Interest at 3% is payable from the date of payment, as the pursuers' possession was attributable to the landlord, not the defenders.

Citation
[1912] ScotLR 167
Parties
Pursuer: Duncan, Galloway & Company, Limited; Defender: Duncan, Falconer, & Company, Limited; Defender: James Wright; Defender: William Duncan
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
29 November 1912
Procedural Posture
Civil / Appeal (inner House, Second Division)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; interlocutor of the Lord Ordinary adhered to with variation; sixth plea-in-law for pursuers sustained instead of fourth; no expenses awarded in the Inner House.
Legal Topics
Innocent Misrepresentation, Repetition (recovery of Money Paid in Error), Warrandice (warranty of Title), Sale of Goods, Error in Contract, Interest on Sums Paid in Error
Contract Law Property Law Innocent Misrepresentation Repetition (recovery of Money Paid in Error) Warrandice (warranty of Title) Sale of Goods Error in Contract Interest on Sums Paid in Error

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 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Duncan, Galloway & Company, Limited

Pursuer

Duncan, Falconer, & Company, Limited

Defender

James Wright

Defender

William Duncan

Defender

Procedural Posture

Civil / Appeal (inner House, Second Division)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether purchasers are entitled to repetition of the price paid for subjects erroneously included in a sale due to innocent misrepresentation by the sellers.
  2. 2 Whether interest is payable on the sum to be repaid, and from what date.

Ratio Decidendi

The pursuers are entitled to repetition of the price paid for subjects erroneously included in the sale due to the defenders' innocent misrepresentation, as the payment was made under an error of fact induced by the defenders. Interest at 3% is payable from the date of payment, as the pursuers' possession was attributable to the landlord, not the defenders.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; interlocutor of the Lord Ordinary adhered to with variation; sixth plea-in-law for pursuers sustained instead of fourth; no expenses awarded in the Inner House.

Orders

  • Defenders to repay the sum sued for (£350 12s 3d) to the pursuers with interest at 3% from 1 September 1902.
  • No expenses awarded in the Inner House.