Gordon v Macgregor

The case of *Gordon v Macgregor* involved an appeal to the High Court of Australia from a decision of the Full Court of Queensland. The dispute concerned a written contract for the supply of log timber. The plaintiff, a timber merchant, sued the defendant for breach of contract, alleging the timber had not been supplied. The defendant raised several defences, including denying the contract, claiming it was conditional on obtaining a licence, and asserting that the plaintiff had agreed to accept logs of a smaller girth and that no fixed delivery time was agreed upon.

The legal issues before the court included whether the written contract accurately represented the entire agreement between the parties, particularly concerning the commencement of deliveries and the minimum girth of the logs. A further issue was whether the trial judge had erred in allowing the defendant to amend his pleadings after the close of evidence to raise the Statute of Frauds as a defence, based on an alleged oral agreement that varied the written terms.

The High Court, in allowing the appeal, affirmed the decision of the Full Court of Queensland. The Court applied the principle that where parties reduce their agreement into writing, they are bound by the written document unless it can be shown that the writing was not intended to embody the whole contract. The Court found that the defendant had failed to establish that the written contract did not represent the entirety of the agreement. Specifically, the alleged oral agreement regarding a three-month delay before delivery commenced was considered at best ambiguous and, in light of the defendant's own evidence denying any fixed time, insufficient to vary the written terms. Similarly, the claim of a verbal agreement on minimum log girth was found to be unsupported by evidence. The Court also expressed reservations about the trial judge's exercise of discretion in allowing the amendment of pleadings so late in the proceedings, noting the potential for unfairness and the lack of sufficient evidence to support the new defence.

The High Court ordered that the appeal be dismissed, upholding the judgment of the Full Court of Queensland which had set aside the trial judge's verdict for the defendant and entered judgment for the plaintiff for £2,500 in damages.