Dowling v Rae

The case of *Dowling v Rae* involved an appeal to the High Court of Australia from the Supreme Court of Victoria. The respondent, Rae, had sued several parties, including the appellants, alleging they acted as his del credere agents in the sale of sheep. The core of the dispute was whether the agents, having guaranteed the payment of the purchase money by the buyer, were released from their liability when the date for delivery of the sheep was verbally postponed at the buyer's request.

The legal issues before the High Court were whether the appellants were indeed del credere agents for the respondent, whether they had guaranteed the purchase money, and crucially, whether the verbal postponement of the delivery date constituted a variation of the contract that would release them from their guarantee. The appellants argued that any alteration to the contract, particularly the delivery date, without their consent discharged them from their obligations as guarantors.

A majority of the High Court, comprising Knox C.J., Isaacs and Powers JJ., found that the appellants had indeed acted as del credere agents and had guaranteed the purchase money. They reasoned that the contract for the sale of sheep was one that the Statute of Frauds required to be in writing. Consequently, a subsequent verbal agreement to postpone the delivery date was not a legally effective variation of the contract. Therefore, the original contract remained in force, and the appellants were not released from their liability under the guarantee. The decision of the Supreme Court of Victoria was affirmed.