Legal Research
Cases
JJ Savage & Sons Pty Ltd v Blakney

JJ Savage & Sons Pty Ltd v Blakney

Link copied

Case Copied 18 March 1970 11 min read

Contents

On this page

J J Savage & Sons Pty Ltd v Blakney [1970] HCA 6; (1970) 119 CLR 435 (18 March 1970)

HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

J. J. SAVAGE & SONS PTY. LTD. v. BLAKNEY [1970] HCA 6; (1970) 119 CLR 435

Contract

High Court of Australia

Barwick C.J.(1), Kitto(1), Menzies(1), Owen(1) and Walsh(1) JJ.

CATCHWORDS

Contract - Sale of goods - Collateral warranty - Element of promise necessary - Statement about "estimated speed" of boat.

HEARING

Melbourne, 1970, February 24;

Sydney, 1970, March 18. 18:3:1970

APPEAL from the Supreme Court of Victoria.

DECISION

March 18.

THE COURT delivered the following written judgment:-

The respondent entered into a contract with the appellant for the delivery with a specified principal diesel engine supplemented by an auxiliary engine to be chosen from two named types of diesel engine. The contract is to be found in a series of letters, supplemented as the respondent claims by several oral conversations. The respondent complained in the action brought in the Supreme Court of Victoria, according to his statement of claim, of a number of breaches of the contract, including an alleged breach of a warranty contained in the contract. That warranty was "that the said cruiser when fitted with a single 4/53 series diesel marine engine (being the specified principal diesel engine to which I have referred)" would have an estimated maximum speed of fifteen miles per hour. [1973] VicRp 37; (1973) VR 385 (at p438)

2. The learned judge of the Supreme Court who tried the case found that no such warranty was contained in the contractual arrangements made by the parties. However, his Honour found that there were some breaches of the agreement and in respect of them gave judgment for the respondent for the sum of $800. (at p438)

3. The respondent appealed to the Full Court against the trial judge's refusal to find a warranty in the stated terms. The Full Court, whilst accepting the trial judge's view of the facts, differed from him in respect of the inference to be drawn from the relevant pieces of evidence on which the respondent had relied to establish the warranty. (at p438)

4. The Full Court agreed with the trial judge that the contract for the building and delivery of the boat did not contain a promise by the appellant in the terms claimed by the respondent. (at p438)

5. But the Full Court was of opinion that the respondent had established a collateral warranty that the boat fitted with the 4/53 G.M. diesel engine would travel at approximately fifteen miles per hour. Accordingly the Court ordered that judgment be entered for the respondent, in addition to the sum of $800, for the damages sustained by him for the breach of that warranty, such damages to be ascertained by a master. (at p438)

6. The central piece of evidence in the case relevant to the claim to a warranty was a letter written by the appellant to the respondent in response to the respondent's request for…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read JJ Savage & Sons Pty Ltd v Blakney and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [1970] HCA 6
Decision Date: 18 March 1970

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In *J. J. Savage & Sons Pty Ltd v Blakney*, the High Court of Australia considered a dispute arising from the sale of a motor cruiser. The purchaser, Mr. Blakney, alleged that the seller, J. J. Savage & Sons Pty Ltd, had made a collateral warranty regarding the boat's speed, which he claimed had not been met. Mr. Blakney sought to rely on a statement made by the seller during negotiations that the boat would have an "estimated speed" of 15 miles per hour.

The central legal issue before the High Court was whether the statement concerning the "estimated speed" of the boat constituted a collateral warranty, thereby creating a binding contractual obligation on the seller, or if it was merely a representation of opinion or expectation. The court had to determine if the statement possessed the necessary promissory character to be elevated from a mere representation to a warranty that could be breached.

The High Court held that the statement regarding the "estimated speed" did not amount to a collateral warranty. The court reasoned that for a statement to be a collateral warranty, it must be intended by the parties to be a promise. In this instance, the use of the word "estimated" indicated that the speed was not a definite promise but rather an approximation or an opinion. The court applied the principle that a statement, to be a warranty, must be made in such terms as to show that it is intended to be a binding promise, and that the other party relies on it as such. The language used by the seller did not demonstrate this intention to be legally bound to a specific speed.

Consequently, the High Court found that there was no collateral warranty and therefore no breach of contract on the part of J. J. Savage & Sons Pty Ltd.

Orders