Muller & Co. v. Weber & Schaer [1901] ScotLR 38_305 (29 January 1901)

Muller & Co. v. Weber & Schaer [1901] ScotLR 38_305 (29 January 1901)

It is incompetent to prove by parole evidence that a contract, established by clear and unequivocal written sale-notes, was in reality a contract of agency or of another character. Such an averment, being both innominate and unusual, can only be proved by writ or oath. Allowing parole evidence would undermine the certainty and reliability of written contracts.

Citation
[1901] ScotLR 38_305
Parties
Pursuer: Muller & Company; Defender: Weber & Schaer
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
29 January 1901
Procedural Posture
Civil / Appeal (reclaiming Motion) From Interlocutor of Lord Ordinary
Outcome
appeal dismissed; interlocutor of Lord Ordinary adhered to
Legal Topics
Proof of Contract, Admissibility of Parole Evidence, Innominate Contracts, Agency Versus Sale, Requirements for Written Evidence
Contract Law Evidence Law Proof of Contract Admissibility of Parole Evidence Innominate Contracts Agency Versus Sale Requirements for Written Evidence

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

Parties

Muller & Company

Pursuer

Weber & Schaer

Defender

Procedural Posture

Civil / Appeal (reclaiming Motion) From Interlocutor of Lord Ordinary

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an alleged antecedent verbal agreement can be used to qualify or displace the terms of a written contract of sale
  2. 2 Whether such an agreement, being innominate and unusual, can only be proved by writ or oath

Ratio Decidendi

It is incompetent to prove by parole evidence that a contract, established by clear and unequivocal written sale-notes, was in reality a contract of agency or of another character. Such an averment, being both innominate and unusual, can only be proved by writ or oath. Allowing parole evidence would undermine the certainty and reliability of written contracts.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed; interlocutor of Lord Ordinary adhered to

Orders

  • Sustains the fifth plea-in-law for the pursuers; allows the defenders a proof by writ of the pursuers of defenders' averments in statement 6; allows the pursuers a proof of their averments on record and to the defenders a conjunct probation; otherwise adheres to the Lord Ordinary's interlocutor.