Woodburn v. Andrew Motherwell, Ltd [1917] ScotLR 472 (06 June 1917)

Woodburn v. Andrew Motherwell, Ltd [1917] ScotLR 472 (06 June 1917)

The property and risk in the hay passed to the buyer when the buyer, under the contract, took possession and baled the hay for his own purposes, as this act was inconsistent with the seller's ownership. The intention of the parties, as gathered from the contract and conduct, was that property should pass at that...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[1917] ScotLR 472
Parties
Pursuer: Andrew Woodburn; Defender: Andrew Motherwell, Limited
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
06 June 1917
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Sheriff Court to Court of Session Inner House, First Division
Outcome
appeal dismissed; interlocutor of Sheriff-Substitute adhered to
Legal Topics
Sale of Goods, Transfer of Property and Risk, Interpretation of Contract, Acceptance of Goods
Contract Law Commercial Law Sale of Goods Transfer of Property and Risk Interpretation of Contract Acceptance of Goods

Source-derived case record

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 4 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Andrew Woodburn

Pursuer

Andrew Motherwell, Limited

Defender

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Sheriff Court to Court of Session Inner House, First Division

Legal Issues

  1. 1 When does property and risk in goods pass from seller to buyer under a contract for sale of specific goods, particularly where acts remain to be done for ascertaining price or delivery?
  2. 2 Does baling by the buyer constitute acceptance and transfer of property under the Sale of Goods Act 1893, section 35?

Ratio Decidendi

The property and risk in the hay passed to the buyer when the buyer, under the contract, took possession and baled the hay for his own purposes, as this act was inconsistent with the seller's ownership. The intention of the parties, as gathered from the contract and conduct, was that property should pass at that point, and the subsequent weighing for price determination did not delay the transfer of property.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed; interlocutor of Sheriff-Substitute adhered to

Orders

  • Defenders (Andrew Motherwell, Limited) held liable for the value of the hay destroyed by fire; amount to be ascertained as per contract.