Sou & Ho Trading Investments Pty Ltd v Daybest Pty Ltd

Sou & Ho Trading Investments Pty Ltd (the plaintiff) brought proceedings against Daybest Pty Ltd (the defendant) in the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The dispute concerned the plaintiff's claim for damages for breach of contract, arising from the defendant's alleged failure to deliver goods under a contract for the sale of goods. The plaintiff sought to recover the difference between the contract price and the market price of the goods at the time of the alleged breach.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether the defendant had breached the contract by failing to deliver the goods as agreed. This involved determining the terms of the contract, particularly regarding the delivery obligations of the defendant, and whether those obligations had been fulfilled. A secondary issue was the appropriate measure of damages to be awarded to the plaintiff if a breach was established.

Justice Terry Williams found that the defendant had breached the contract by failing to deliver the goods. His Honour reasoned that the evidence established a clear contractual obligation on the part of the defendant to deliver the specified goods by a certain date. The defendant's failure to do so constituted a repudiatory breach of the contract. In assessing damages, the Court applied the principle that the measure of damages for breach of contract for the sale of goods is the difference between the contract price and the market price of the goods at the time of the breach, aiming to place the innocent party in the position they would have been in had the contract been performed.

The Court ordered that the plaintiff was entitled to damages, with the amount to be assessed.