Henry Kendall Ltd v William Lillico Ltd
| Henry Kendall Ltd v William Lillico Ltd | |
|---|---|
| Court | House of Lords |
| Citation | [1969] 2 AC 31 |
| Transcript | [1] |
| Court membership | |
| Judges sitting | Lord Reid, Lord Morris of Borth-y-Gest, Lord Guest, Lord Pearce, Lord Wilberforce |
| Keywords | |
| Incorporation | |
Henry Kendall Ltd v William Lillico Ltd [1969] 2 AC 31 is an English contract law case concerning the incorporation of contract terms through a course of dealings.
Facts
[edit]Animal food was sold by merchants to a farmer. It was defective. The merchants brought in suppliers, and they in turn brought in their suppliers, a long chain. (hence also Hardwick Game v Suffolk Agricultural Poultry Producers Association). Purchases three or four times a month had happened for three or so years, and each time, a sold note followed, which said the buyer took responsibility for any latent defects. The buyers had never read the note.
Judgment
[edit]The House of Lords held that a reasonable seller in the circumstances would have had good cause to assume that the buyer agreed to the term, hence rejecting Lord Devlin’s McCutcheon dicta that previous dealings needed to prove actual knowledge.
See also
[edit]Contract terms cases | |
|---|---|
L'Estrange v F Graucob Ltd [1934] 2 KB 394 | |
Chapelton v Barry UDC [1940] 1 KB 532 | |
Smith v Hughes (1871) LR 6 QB 597 | |
Hartog v Colin & Shields [1939] 3 All ER 566 | |
Thake v Maurice [1986] QB 644 | |
Carter v Boehm (1766) 3 Burr 1905 | |
The Moorcock (1889) 14 PD 64 | |
Mahmud and Malik v BCCI [1997] UKHL 23 | |
Johnstone v Bloomsbury HA [1991] 2 All ER 293 | |
Liverpool CC v Irwin [1976] UKHL 1 | |
Notes
[edit]References
[edit]Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.
