Crichton & Stevenson v. Love [1908] ScotLR 600 (19 March 1908)

Crichton & Stevenson v. Love [1908] ScotLR 600 (19 March 1908)

Section 14(1) of the Sale of Goods Act 1893 applies where the buyer discloses the purpose and relies on the seller's skill or judgment, even for products like coal. The communings with Honeyman formed part of the transaction, and the seller knew the coal was for bunkering a steamer. The coal supplied was not reasonably fit for that purpose, so the implied warranty was breached and the defender was not liable for the price.

Citation
[1908] ScotLR 600
Parties
Pursuers: Crichton & Stevenson; Defender: Robert Love
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
19 March 1908
Procedural Posture
Civil / Appeal From Sheriff Court Judgment
Outcome
appeal sustained; defender assoilzied
Legal Topics
Sale of Goods, Implied Warranty, Fitness for Purpose, Seller's Knowledge, Statutory Interpretation
Commercial Law Contract Law Sale of Goods Implied Warranty Fitness for Purpose Seller's Knowledge Statutory Interpretation

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

Parties

Crichton & Stevenson

Pursuers

Robert Love

Defender

Procedural Posture

Civil / Appeal From Sheriff Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Does section 14(1) of the Sale of Goods Act 1893 apply to the sale of coal for bunkering a steamer?
  2. 2 Was there an implied warranty of fitness for purpose given the seller's knowledge and buyer's reliance?
  3. 3 Is the defender liable for the price of coal supplied but found unfit for its intended purpose?

Ratio Decidendi

Section 14(1) of the Sale of Goods Act 1893 applies where the buyer discloses the purpose and relies on the seller's skill or judgment, even for products like coal. The communings with Honeyman formed part of the transaction, and the seller knew the coal was for bunkering a steamer. The coal supplied was not reasonably fit for that purpose, so the implied warranty was breached and the defender was not liable for the price.

Court Disposition

appeal sustained; defender assoilzied

Orders

  • Recall the interlocutor of the Sheriff-Substitute dated March 30, 1907
  • Find in fact that the defender ordered coal for bunkering a steamer, disclosed the purpose, and relied on the pursuers' skill and judgment