Four parties were invited to tender for the supply of stone to a public authority. They agreed that one would buy stone from the others and submit the lowest tender, two parties were to submit a higher tender and the fourth party was to submit no tender. The defendants, in breach of the agreement, submitted a tender, which was accepted, and the party which was to supply under the agreement brought proceedings to restrain performance by the party which had broken ranks.
Held: The action succeeded.
Bacon V-C considered the plaintiff’s case as ‘very honest’. It was submitted that the plaintiff could not obtain equitable relief since the arrangement was a device to compel the authority, under the fiction of a public competition, to accept tenders not representing the real market price of the commodity, but this submission the vice-chancellor rejected, finding the agreement to be ‘perfectly lawful’, to contain ‘nothing illegal’, and not deserving to be characterised as a conspiracy.
Judges:
Bacon V-C
Citations:
(1888) 21 QBD 544
Cited by:
Cited – Norris v United States of America and others HL 12-Mar-2008
The detainee appealed an order for extradition to the USA, saying that the offence (price-fixing) was not one known to English common law. The USA sought his extradition under the provisions of the Sherman Act.
Held: It was not, and it would . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Commercial, Contract
Updated: 05 May 2022; Ref: scu.270733