• Order
  • Offers
  • Support
    • Monday 30th December: 08:00 - 21:00 Tuesday 31st December: 09:00 - 13:00 Wednesday 1st January: Closed Thursday 2nd: 08:00 - 21:00 You can still place orders while we’re closed, and we’ll process them as soon as we reopen. Thank you for choosing us, and we wish you a happy and successful New Year!

      December 30, 2024

  • Sign In

Disclaimer: This work was produced by one of our expert legal writers, as a learning aid to help law students with their studies.

Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not reflect the views of LawTeacher.net. Any information contained in this case summary does not constitute legal advice and should be treated as educational content only.

Raffles v Wichelhaus - 1864

296 words (1 pages) Case Summary

28th Sep 2021 Case Summary Reference this In-house law team

Jurisdiction / Tag(s): UK Law

Legal Case Summary

Raffles v Wichelhaus (1864) 2 Hurl & C 906

Contract – Mutual Mistake – Contract Formation – Void Contract – Enforceability – Objective Test – Certainty – Breach of Contract – Meeting of the Minds –

Facts

The complainant, Mr Raffles, offered to sell an amount of Surat cotton to the defendant, Mr Wichelhaus. This Surat cotton would be brought to Liverpool by a ship from Bombay, India. This ship was called the Peerless, but there were two ships that had this name. The complainant and the defendant were both thinking about a different Peerless ship when they agreed to make the sale. One of the ships was due to leave Bombay in October, which was what the defendant had thought for his Surat cotton delivery, but the complainant was referring to the ship that was to leave in December. When the Surat cotton arrived in Liverpool, Mr Wichelhaus refused to pay, as in his mind, it was months late.

Issues

The complainant sued the defendant for breach of contract. The issue in this case was whether there was an enforceable contract between the parties.

Decision/Outcome

It was held that the contract between the complainant and defendant was not enforceable. When the contract was being discussed, there was ambiguity in the Peerless and what ship was being referred to, as well as no agreement on the terms on the sale. There had been no consensus ad idem or meeting of the minds between the parties to form a binding contract. The objective test made it clear that a reasonable person would not have been able to identify with certainty what ship had been agreed on.

Cite This Work

To export a reference to this article please select a referencing stye below:

Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.

Related Services

View all

Related Content

Jurisdictions / Tags

Content relating to: "UK Law"

UK law covers the laws and legislation of England, Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland. Essays, case summaries, problem questions and dissertations here are relevant to law students from the United Kingdom and Great Britain, as well as students wishing to learn more about the UK legal system from overseas.

Related Articles