Mathieson gee v Quigley, Facts, Decision, Important points

  • by

The case is concerned with the offer and acceptance chapter in contract law

Facts of Mathieson gee v Quigley

The Claimant used to sell the machinery which used to remove slit from the ponds. The Defendant hired the claimant and asked him to remove the slit from his ponds.

The claimant send his machinery along with some drivers and removed all the slit, after the work the defendant refused to pay the claimant as he said that he was asking for too much price

The claimant sued the defendant for £1,129 as being due under the contract.

Issue:

Whether the contract was concluded or not?

Decision:

As the courts decided that there was no contract between the parties. As the courts asid that there were no terms that could be identified by the courts. As the courts used an subjective approach here

Important point of Mathieson gee v Quigley

This case is famous for the point that

Where the parties say that there is a concluded contract between them, the court can still find , that there was in-fact no contract

Related Readings

Statoil ASA v Louis Dreyfus Energy Services IP

Hartog v Colin & shields

Scriven bros v hindley