FavoriteLoadingSave to briefcase | Rating: | By (2012)

  • PrintEmail Link
  • Viewed 273 times | Saved to 329 briefcases
Kingshott v Brunskill, [1953] OWN 133 (C.A.)

Facts:

D bought apples knowing not graded. Some not good quality. D wont pay. The relevant act says sale was illegal

Issue(s):

Can P recover the money that is owed to him under the contract from D, even though the sale of the apples was illegal?

Ratio:

If a sale (contract) is illegal, the seller cannot recover money owed to him by the buyer, because it is against public policy and the contract is void

Analysis:

If the sale was forbidden by regulations, then it was illegal and notwithstanding that the D resold the apples after having graded them and made a profit, P cannot recover in an action for the price of those apples.

The court cannot read into the regulations exemptions which may appear to the court to be justified.

Holding:

P cannot recover money he was owed under the K

Comments:

Distinction between (1) contract contrary to public policy and (2) a contract relating to a matter that relates to a statue ((2) may not be affected unless the wording is clear what the legislative intent is)
**If statute says you cant sell then a contract to sell isn’t enforceable – statute interpretation
***But you have to look very closely at the contract
***Sometimes it will prohibit something else – it must prohibit a contract saying that no one can sell for you to not be able to contract on it
***Must be very specific wording for a contract to be held unenforceable


Leave a Comment

You must be logged in to participate.

This document is a general discussion of certain legal and related issues and must not be relied upon as legal advice. This document may not have been written or reviewed by a legal practitioner. For more information, please see the website Terms of Service.