Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Company v New Garage and Motor Company

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
CourtHouse of Lords
Judgment Date01 Jul 1914
Judgment citation (vLex)[1914] UKHL J0701-1

[1914] UKHL J0701-1

House of Lords

Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Company, Limited,
and
New Garage and Motor Company, Limited.
1

After hearing Counsel, as well on Monday the 18th, as Tuesday the 19th, days of May last, upon the Petition and Appeal of the Dunlop, Pneumatic Tyre Company, Limited, of 14 Regent Street, in the City of Westminster, praying, That the matter of the Order set forth in the Schedule thereto, namely, an Order of His Majesty's Court of Appeal, of the 29th of January 1914, so far as regards the words, "It is Ordered that this Appeal be allowed and that the said Certificate or Finding and so much of the said Judgment signed thereon for the sum of 250 l. and costs of the Enquiry be set aside and instead thereof that Judgment be entered for the Plaintiffs for the sum of 2 l. as nominal damages; and it is Ordered that the Plaintiffs pay to the Defendants or to their Solicitors the costs of this Appeal and the costs of the Enquiry as to damages before Master Bonner such costs to be taxed by one of the Taxing Masters but that the Taxing Master in taxing the said costs of the Enquiry do consider and determine whether such costs have been increased by any omission of the Defendants to state truly in the first instance in answer to the account directed by the Judgment the full number of tyres covers or tubes sold by them in breach of the agreement and that he do disallow such increased costs if any", might be reviewed before His Majesty the King in His Court of Parliament, and that the said Order, so far as aforesaid, might be reversed, varied, or altered, or that the Petitioners might have such other relief in the premises as to His Majesty the King in His Court of Parliament might seem meet; as also upon the printed Case of the New Garage and Motor Company, Limited, lodged in answer to the said Appeal; and due consideration had this day of what was offered on either side in this Cause:

2

It is Ordered and Adjudged, by the Lords Spiritual and Temporal in the Court of Parliament of His Majesty the King assembled, That the said Order of His Majesty's Court of Appeal, of the 29th day of January 1914, so far as complained of in the said Appeal, be, and the same is hereby, Reversed, and that the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
406 cases
  • Emjay Enterprises Pte Ltd v Skylift Consolidator (Pte) Ltd (Direct Services (HK) Ltd, Third Party)
    • Singapore
    • High Court (Singapore)
    • 21 February 2006
    ...Co Ltd v Malvern Fishing Co Ltd [1983] 1 WLR 964 (refd) Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Company, Limited v New Garage and Motor Company, Limited [1915] AC 79 (distd) Metro Pte Ltd v Wormald Security (SEA) Pte Ltd [1981-1982] SLR (R) 126; [1980-1981] SLR 539 (refd) Moschi v Lep Air Services Ltd [1973]......
  • Kin Shipping Line Sdn Bhd and Others; Pershowa Leasing (M) Sdn Bhd
    • Malaysia
    • High Court (Malaysia)
    • 1 January 1988
  • Launceston Property Finance Ltd v Burke
    • Ireland
    • Supreme Court
    • 15 March 2017
    ...clauses remains the principles set out in the speech of Lord Dunedin in Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Co. Ltd. v. New Garage and Motor Co. Ltd. [1915] A.C. 79 (‘ Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Co.’) at pp. 86-88. These principles were endorsed by the Supreme Court in Pat O'Donnell & Co. Ltd v Truck and ......
  • Campbell Discount Company Ltd v Bridge
    • United Kingdom
    • House of Lords
    • 25 January 1962
    ...of damage." See per Lord Dunedin in Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Company, Limited v. New Garage and Motor Company, Limited [1915] A.C. 79 at p. 86. 22I find it impossible to regard the sum stipulated in Clause 9 as a genuine pre-estimate of the loss which would be suffered by the Respondents......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
33 firm's commentaries
  • Are Contract Terms Really Binding? Part 1 of 2
    • United Kingdom
    • Mondaq United Kingdom
    • 16 April 2007
    ...which is likely to be suffered by B in the event of such breach." Identifying a penalty clause In Dunlop Ltd v New Garage Co Ltd [1915] A.C. 79, Lord Dunedin provided the well-known guidance: "The question whether a sum stipulated is penalty or liquidated damages is a question of ......
  • Container Detention Charges Decision Sparks Debate
    • Australia
    • Mondaq Australia
    • 27 May 2010
    ...HCA 71 where the Court endorsed the principles expounded by Lord Dunedin in Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Co Ltd v New Garage and Motors Co Ltd [1915] AC 79. Member Meadows 'In my opinion, there is simply no doubt that the amount claimed by the respondent in the contract as a container detention fe......
  • Bank Fees Class Action In Australia Fails Before Full Federal Court
    • Australia
    • Mondaq Australia
    • 21 May 2015
    ...Andrews v Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Ltd (2012) 247 CLR 205; Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Company Ltd v New Garage and Moto Co Ltd [1915] AC 79; AMEV-UDC Finance Ltd v Austin (1986) 162 CLR 3 Paciocco v Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited [2015] FCAFC 50, [330]. 4 Ibid, [3......
  • Penalty Clauses: A Question Of Context?
    • United Kingdom
    • JD Supra United Kingdom
    • 7 July 2015
    ...Shipbuilding Co Ltd v Don Jose Ramos Yzquierdo y Castaneda [1905] AC 6 and Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Co Ltd v New Garage and Motor Co. Ltd [1915] AC 79 to derive the following general The essence of a penalty is a payment of money intended to deter; the essence of liquidated damages is a genuin......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
4 books & journal articles

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT