Cameron-Head v Cameron & Co [1919] ScotCS CSIH_1 (10 July 1919)

Cameron-Head v Cameron & Co [1919] ScotCS CSIH_1 (10 July 1919)

The stipulated sum of ten shillings per day for delay is a reasonable pre-estimate of damages and constitutes liquidated damages, not a penalty. The sum is immediately exigible for each day's delay beyond the contract period, and the action is not premature. The contract should be construed according to its terms and the intention of the parties, and the court will not interfere with the agreed sum absent evidence of unreasonableness or disproportionality.

Citation
[1919] ScotCS CSIH_1
Parties
Pursuer: Cameron-Head; Defender: Cameron & Co.
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
10 July 1919
Procedural Posture
Civil / Appeal
Outcome
appeal dismissed; judgment for pursuer affirmed
Legal Topics
Liquidated Damages, Penalty Clauses, Construction of Contract, Timber Sale, Delay in Performance
Contract Liquidated Damages Penalty Clauses Construction of Contract Timber Sale Delay in Performance

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

Parties

Cameron-Head

Pursuer

Cameron & Co.

Defender

Procedural Posture

Civil / Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the stipulated sum of ten shillings per day for delay is a penalty or liquidated damages
  2. 2 Whether the action for payment of the sum is premature or can be brought before contract completion
  3. 3 Whether the pursuer provided reasonable facilities for removal of timber as required under the contract

Ratio Decidendi

The stipulated sum of ten shillings per day for delay is a reasonable pre-estimate of damages and constitutes liquidated damages, not a penalty. The sum is immediately exigible for each day's delay beyond the contract period, and the action is not premature. The contract should be construed according to its terms and the intention of the parties, and the court will not interfere with the agreed sum absent evidence of unreasonableness or disproportionality.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed; judgment for pursuer affirmed

Orders

  • First, second, and fifth pleas in law for defenders repelled
  • Proof allowed on the causes of delay, defenders to lead evidence