Street against Blay
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1831 |
| Date | 01 January 1831 |
| Court | Court of the King's Bench |
English Reports Citation: 109 E.R. 1212
IN THE COURT OF KING'S BENCH.
Applied, Gompertz v. Denton, 1832, 1 Cr. & M. 209. Allen v. Cameron, 1833, 1 Cr. & M. 840. Referred to, Pateshall v. Tranter, 1835, 3 Ad. & E. 105. Explained, Mondel v. Steel, 1841, 8 Mee. & W. 869. Applied, Parsons v. Sexton, 1847, 4 C. B. 908. Referred to, Syers v. Jonas, 1848, 2 Ex. 117. Explained and followed, Murray v. Mann, 1848, 2 Ex. 541. Discussed, Dawson v. Collis, 1851, 10 C. B. 531. Referred to, Bannerman v. White, 1861, 10 C. B. N. S. 857; Kennedy v. Panama, New Zealand and Australian Royal Mail Company, 1867, L. R. 2 Q. B. 587; Heilbutt v. Hickson, 1872, L. R. 7 C. P. 451; Loughnan v. Barry, 1872, Ir. R. 6 C. L. 462; In re Green and Balfour, 1890, 63 L. T. 99, 325.
street against blay. 1831. A person who has purchased a horse warranted sound, 'òsold it again, and then repurchased it, cannot, on discovering that the horse was unsound when first sold, require the original vendor to take it back again; nor can he, by reason of the unsoundness, resist an action by such vendor for the price. But he may give the breach of warranty in evidence in reduction of damages. Semble, that the purchaser of a speeinVchattel under warranty, having once accepted it, can in no instance return the chattel, or resist an action for the price, on the ground of breach of warranty, unless in case of fraud, or express agreement authorizing the return, or consent of the vendor. But where the contract is executory only when the chattel is received, as where goods are ordered of a manufacturer, and he contracts to supply them of a certain quality, or fit for a certain purpose, the vendee may rescind the contract if the goods do not answer the warranty, provided he has not kept them longer than was necessary for the purpose of trial, or exercised the dominion of an owner over them, as by selling them. [Applied, Gompertz v. Denton, 1832, 1 Cr. & M. 209. Allen v. Cameron, 1833, 1 Or. & M. 840. Referred to, Pateshall v. Tranter, 1835, 3 Ad. & E. 105. Explained, Mondel v. Steel, 1841, 8 Mee. & W. 869. Applied, Parsons v. Sexton, 1847, 4 C. B. 908. Referred to, Syers v. Jonas, 1848, 2 Ex. 117. Explained and followed, Murray v. Mann, 1848, 2 Ex. 541. Discussed, Dawson v. Collis, 1851,10 C. B. 531. Referred to, Bannerman v. White, 1861, 10 C. B. N. S. 857 ; Kennedy v. Panama, New Zealand and Australian Eoyal Mail Company, 1867, L. R. 2 Q. B. 587; Heilbutt v. Hickson, 1872, L. R. 7 C. P. 451; Lmghnan v. Barry, 1872, Ir. R. 6 C. L. 462; In re Green and Balfour, 1890, 63 L. T. 99, 325.] Assumpsit for a horse sold and delivered. Plea, the general issue. At the trial before Lord Tenterden C.J., at the sittings in London after Trinity term 1830, the following facts were proved. The defendant, a horse-dealer, bought the horse of the plaintiff, warranted sound, at 431., on the 2d of February 1830, and on the same day sold him to a customer, Mr. Bailey, for 451. This purchaser, after having the horse in his possession a day, parted with him in exchange to another person, who also kept him a day, and then sold him again to the defendant for 301. It did not appear that there was any warranty, except on the first sale. On the 9th of February the defendant sent the horse back to the plaintiff's premises, alleging that he was unsound, and had been so at the time of the purchase on the 2d, and requiring the plaintiff to receive him again. The horse, when so returned, was lame. ' The plaintiff insisted that he was not bound to take the horse back, and brought this action to recover the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Henriksens Rederi A/S v T. H. Z. Rolimpex (Brede)
...to his remedy by separate action. But there is equally no doubt that by the time of the judgment of Lord Tenterden, Chief Justice, in Street v. Blay (1831) 2 13. & Ad. 456, the rigours of the old practice had been considerably mitigated as a matter of convenience in order to avoid circuity ......
-
Behn v Burness
... ... Behn against Burness Reversed in Exchequer Chamber, 3 B. & S. 751 (with note) ... ...
-
Great Peace Shipping Ltd v Tsavliris Salvage (International) Ltd (Cape Providence)
...was a warranty, he cannot return the horse and claim back the whole price, unless there was a condition to that effect in the contract: Street v Blay 2 B & Ad 456." 56 At p.588 Blackburn J. observed that the principle of English law was the same as that of civil law, to the effect that: "… ......
-
Loughnan v Barry and Byrne
...v. MerryENRENR 1 H. & N. 503; 11 Ex. 577. Masters v. IbbersonENR 8 C. B. 100. Childers v. WoolerENR 2 E. & E. 267. Street v. BlayENR 2 B. & Ad. 456. Kingsford v. MerryENRENR 11 Ex. 577; 1 H. & N. 503. Sale of Goods — Payment by Cheque — False representation — Trover — Money had and received......