M'Master & Co. v. Cox, M'Euen, & Co.

(Before the Lord Chancellor , Viscount Finlay , Lord Dunedin , Lord Atkinson , and Lord Shaw .)

In an action of damages at the instance of the sellers for breach of contract, held ( reversing the judgment of the Second Division, diss . Lord Dundas) that the Jute (Export) Order and the refusal of the permit had not the effect of voiding the contract, there being no contractual terms, express or implied, as to the market in which the goods were to be disposed of, and that accordingly the buyers were in breach of contract in refusing to take delivery.

I ought not to pass from this immediate subject without placing on record my own view that the two judgments which Mr Sandeman abandoned in his argument would not have afforded him any support or sustenance had he attempted to recommend their conclusions in this House. I have myself no doubt that the learned Judges who delivered those judgments were under a misapprehension when they founded themselves upon the authorities upon which they relied.

I have the good fortune to find myself in almost complete agreement with the judgment delivered by Lord Dundas, and that degree of agreement relieves me from the duty of discussing this matter with the detail I should otherwise have thought necessary. I will therefore merely indicate the two grounds which have led me without any doubt to the conclusion that this appeal must succeed.

I do not consider that the point taken by Mr Sandeman at this late stage of the litigation is open to him, having regard to the Page: 72 ↓