Marshall & Co. v. Nicoll & Son [1918] ScotLR 178 (21 December 1918)

Marshall & Co. v. Nicoll & Son [1918] ScotLR 178 (21 December 1918)

The majority held that there was sufficient evidence of an available market for the steel sheets at the date of breach, and that the proper measure of damages was the difference between the contract price and the market price as per Sale of Goods Act 1893, section 51(3). The fact that the goods were made to specification did not exclude the application of the statutory measure. The Lord Ordinary's figures for damages were accepted as reasonable based on the available evidence.

Citation
[1918] ScotLR 178
Parties
Pursuer: Marshall & Company; Defender: Nicoll & Son
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
21 December 1918
Procedural Posture
Civil / Appeal (reclaiming Motion) From Lord Ordinary
Outcome
appeal allowed in part; interlocutor of Lord Ordinary recalled; decree for pursuers for £3475
Legal Topics
Sale of Goods, Breach of Contract, Damages, Measure of Damages, Available Market, Market Price
Contract Law Commercial Law Sale of Goods Breach of Contract Damages Measure of Damages Available Market Market Price

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 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Marshall & Company

Pursuer

Nicoll & Son

Defender

Procedural Posture

Civil / Appeal (reclaiming Motion) From Lord Ordinary

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there was an available market for the goods at the date of breach under Sale of Goods Act 1893, section 51(3)
  2. 2 What is the proper measure of damages for non-delivery of specially manufactured goods

Ratio Decidendi

The majority held that there was sufficient evidence of an available market for the steel sheets at the date of breach, and that the proper measure of damages was the difference between the contract price and the market price as per Sale of Goods Act 1893, section 51(3). The fact that the goods were made to specification did not exclude the application of the statutory measure. The Lord Ordinary's figures for damages were accepted as reasonable based on the available evidence.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed in part; interlocutor of Lord Ordinary recalled; decree for pursuers for £3475

Orders

  • Defenders to pay pursuers £3475 in damages