Edgar v. Hector

Melvin Edgar, dealer in modern and antique furniture, 241 Eglinton Street, Glasgow, pursuer , brought an action in the Sheriff Court at Glasgow against William Cunningham Hector, artist, Glasgow, defender , for the sum of £145, being the price of a suite of eight small and two ribbon-back mahogany chairs sold by the pursuer to the defender.

The defender pleaded—“(1) The contract of purchase having been induced by the verbal misrepresentations of pursuer, and the misrepresentation arising from the actual appearance of the chairs, the contract should be rescinded and decree granted in favour of defender for £95 and expenses.”

The following narrative of the facts of the case and the import of the evidence is taken from the opinion of Lord Mackenzie ( infra )—“The pursuer carries on business in Glasgow, and designs himself as a dealer in antiques. On 18th May 1910 he sold to the defender six small and two arm ribbon back mahogany chairs at the price of £120; the defender agreed to pay the pursuer a further sum of £25 if the pursuer could procure for him two additional small chairs. On the same date the Page: 283 ↓

Lord Mackenzie —The question in this case is whether the Sheriff-Substitute and the Sheriff were right in holding that the defender is entitled to set aside a contract of sale on the ground of essential error induced by the misrepresentation of the pursuer.

[ After a further narrative of the facts ]—I take the same view as the Sheriff-Substitute in regard to what passed between the pursuer and the defender at their meeting on 4th June.* It is only fair to the pursuer to recognise the fact that £145 was not an unfair price for the chairs, and that if the chairs had been genuine they would have been worth a great deal more. The defender, however, does not seem to have been possessed of the necessary knowledge to be aware of this fact. For the reasons above stated, I am of opinion that he is entitled to be relieved of his bargain.