Whittington v Seale-Hayne [1900]

Facts

  • Whittington purchased a poultry farm based on a representation that the farm was sanitary and in good condition

Issue

  • Could the contract be rescinded where the farm was not sanitary¬†and in good repair?

Decision

  • No, but an indemnity was awarded

Reasoning

  • An indemnity allows for consequential losses to be compensated for, not due to the misrepresentation, which did not give rise to a cause of action. Costs were awarded for repairs to the farm, profit and rent.
RELATED CASE  Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain v Boots Cash Chemists Ltd [1953]

Posted in Contract Law Revision Notes.

This page was last updated on 27th April 2014

© 2020 Webstroke Law - Terms and Privacy Policy