Leagl Case Summary
White & Carter (Councils) Ltd v McGregor  UKHL 5
Contract law – Payments – Repudiation
White & Carter, the appellants, were advertising contractors that agreed with a representative of a garage proprietor to advertise for his garage for the period of three years. The respondent, the garage owner, wrote to the appellant on the same day of the agreement to cancel as the representative was mistaken during the negotiation. The appellants refused this and began advertising for the garage five months after the contract had been agreed between the parties. The respondent refused to pay and the appellant sued for the whole amount of the contract.
The court was required to understand whether the contract between the parties could be repudiated on the basis of the mistake that had been made by the representative of the garage owner. If this repudiation was not permitted, then it had to be determined whether the appellants could claim for the whole of the contract value or whether the damages would be limited. It was also argued by the respondent that where a party has no legitimate interest in performing the contract, the burden should not be placed on the other party unnecessarily.
The court found that the appellants had the right to carry out the contract and claim for the entire value of the contract. On this basis, this did not require the appellant to accept the withdrawal of the contract by the respondent. The court did not accept the argument that was put forward by the respondent as to the enforcement by the appellant of the contract.
Cite This Work
To export a reference to this article please select a referencing stye below:
Related ServicesView all
Related ContentJurisdictions / Tags
Content relating to: "UK Law"
UK law covers the laws and legislation of England, Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland. Essays, case summaries, problem questions and dissertations here are relevant to law students from the United Kingdom and Great Britain, as well as students wishing to learn more about the UK legal system from overseas.
The rule of law can be defined as the fundamental
part a The rule of law itself traces back to Aristotle who said that ‘the rule of law is preferable to any individual’ . This still holds true ......
R v Navid Tabassum - Criminal law consent case
NAVID TABASSUM. On 30th November 1999 at Preston Crown Court, following a trial before His Honour Judge Livesey QC, the appellant was convicted on three counts of indecent assault, on three different female complainants....