SuperlawGH

Contract Law Case Brief

Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain v Boots Cash Chemists (Southern) Ltd

Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain v Boots Cash Chemists (Southern) Ltd [1952] 2 QB 795 (Court of Queen’s Bench) [1953] 1 QB 401 (CA) In the case of Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain v Boots Cash Chemists (Southern) Ltd, the defendant, Boots faced charges under the Pharmacy and Poisons Act 1933, section 18, which mandated […]

Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain v Boots Cash Chemists (Southern) Ltd Read More »

Case Brief: Gibson v Manchester City Council

In Gibson v Manchester City Council [1979] 1 WLR 294 (HL), the case revolved around the Council’s policy of selling council houses to tenants. The respondent tenant applied for details regarding the price and mortgage terms using a printed form. In response, the city treasurer sent a letter indicating that the Council “may be prepared

Case Brief: Gibson v Manchester City Council Read More »

Case Brief: Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co.

Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co. [1893] 1 QB 256 (CA) The defendants, who made and sold a medical product called ‘The Carbolic Smoke Ball’, issued an advertisement in a number of newspapers in the following terms: £100 reward will be paid by the Carbolic Smoke Ball Company to any person who contracts the increasing

Case Brief: Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co. Read More »

Butler Machine Tool Co. Ltd v Ex-Cell-O Corporation (England) Ltd

Butler Machine Tool Co. Ltd v Ex-Cell-O Corporation (England) Ltd [1979] 1 WLR 401 (CA) On 23 May 1969, the sellers issued a quotation offering to sell a machine tool to the buyers for £75,535, delivery to be in ten months’ time. The offer was stated to be subject to certain terms and conditions, which

Butler Machine Tool Co. Ltd v Ex-Cell-O Corporation (England) Ltd Read More »

Case Brief: Brogden v Metropolitan Railway Co.

Brogden v Metropolitan Railway Co. (1877) 2 App Cas 666 (HL) Brogden, the plaintiff had suggested that the defendant Railway Company should enter into a formal contract for the supply and purchase of coal. The Railway Company agreed and sent terms of agreement. Brogden added the name of an arbitrator to settle any differences, before

Case Brief: Brogden v Metropolitan Railway Co. Read More »

error: Copying is Not permitted.
Scroll to Top