Pym v Campbell [1856]

Facts

  • Pym agreed to sell a 1/8 interest in his machine to Campbell and a written document was signed
  • Following inspection, Campbell did not honour the written agreement

Issue

  • Could Pym sue for breach of contract

Decision

  • No breach

Reasoning

  • The agreement evidenced a requirement of satisfaction by Campbell, therefore there could be no agreement as Campbell was not satisfied
RELATED CASE  Ertel Bieber v Rio Tinto [1918]

Posted in Contract Law Revision Notes.

This page was last updated on 17th January 2014

© 2020 Webstroke Law - Terms and Privacy Policy