GIBBS, BRIGHT AND CO. v. ROWAN

13 VLR 621·HIGINBOTHAM, C.J., A’BECKETT, WILLIAMS, and KERFERD, JJ.
13 VLR 621
13 VLR 621
GIBBS, BRIGHT AND CO. v. ROWAN Supreme Court of Victoria (Full Court) HIGINBOTHAM, C.J., A’BECKETT, WILLIAMS, and KERFERD, JJ. May 13, 16, 1887. July 8, 11 July 1887 Contract for sale of goods — Construction — To be shipped in different months — Divisible contract — Treatment of, by parties as a whole — Practice — Amendment asked for too late — Province of judge and jury — Not accepting verdict against evidence all one way — Answer by jury to irrelevant question .

On an action being brought for damages for breach of a contract to buy woolpacks, described as "1000 bales of Calcutta woolpacks; for January shipment to Sydney, 500 bales; for February shipment to Sydney, 500 bales," it was proved that of the first 500 bales only 399 bales were put on board the vessel by which they were to be sent to Sydney, by the end of January, the remaining 101 being put on board by the 7th February. The February shipment was wholly shipped in February by the same ship, which sailed from Calcutta, and arrived in Sydney in April. Bills of lading and acceptances for the 1000 bales were sent to the defendant who, in May, finally refused to accept them. The jury having negatived the existence of any mercantile usage altering the ordinary significance of the words "for January shipment to Sydney":—Held, that those words meant that in the month of January 500 bales were to be put on board a ship bound for Sydney, and did not imply any contract as to when the ship should sail.

""

Continue Reading This Report

13 VLR 621

One-off Purchase

$25
This report only
Permanent access
PDF download
Best Value

Digital Subscription

$45/mo
or $450/yrSAVE $90
All reports included
Unlimited access
Cancel anytime
Don't have an account? Create Account