(Note) Old tentage had been sold at such prices as ‘shall be agreed from time to time’ and at such delivery periods as should be similarly agreed.
Held: There was a mere agreement to agree and no contract had ever come into existence.
Lord Dunedin said: ‘No doubt as to goods, the Sale of Goods Act, 1893, says that if the price is not mentioned and settled in the contract it is to be a reasonable price. The simple answer in this case is that the Sale of Goods Act provides for silence on the point and here there is no silence, because there is a provision that the two parties are to agree.’
Lord Buckmaster spoke of the ‘well recognized principle of contract law that an agreement between two parties to enter into an agreement in which some critical part of the contract matter is left undetermined is no contract at all’, or ‘the principle that you cannot agree to agree.’
Lord Dunedin, Lord Warrington of Clyffe, Lord Buckmaster
[1934] 2 KB 17, [1929] UKHL 2, [1929] All ER Rep 679
Bailii
Sale of Goods Act 1893
Scotland
Cited by:
Cited – Leeds Rugby Ltd v Harris and Bradford Bulls Holdings Limited QBD 20-Jul-2005
The claimant sought damages from the defendants saying that the second defendant had induced a breach of contract by the first when he left to play rugby for the second defendant.
Held: The contract could not be said to be void as an agreement . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Contract
Updated: 21 December 2021; Ref: scu.229006
