Haulier Wins Lorry-sale Dispute
Page 19
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
IN the King's Bench Division last week,, Mr. Justice Croom-Johnson heard a dispute over the purchase of a lorry, in which the plaintiff was Mr. James Hodgkinson, of Lonecliffe Garage, Drassington, Derbyshire. He claimed from Matthews of Stockwell, Ltd., Stockwell Road, Brixton, London, 4698 10s. for breach of contract to supply a lorry of a specified description.
Plaintiff is a haulage contractor and his case was that after seeing an advertisement in a trade journal regarding a 1938 Leyland Lynx lorry for 4950 he decided to purchase. Defendant company took a Studebaker vehicle from plaintiff in part exchange at the agreed value of 4350, the balance of the 'purchase price to be paid on delivery of the lorry. On August 24, 1942, plaintiff sent the Studebaker vehicle to defendant company, which handed over the lorry to his son.
The case for plaintiff was that the lorry was not the vehicle described in the advertisement and was inferior to that advertised. The lorry was later sold by auction for 4251 10s. and plaintiff claimed the difference between that figure and the original purchase price, which was stated to be 4950.
The defence was a denialthat the advertisement was part of the agreement of sale. ,Defendant's son delivered the Studebaker vehicle, took over the Leyland lorry and signed a document saying he had " seen and approved it.'
Giving judgment, Mr. Justice GroomJohnson said the vehicle delivered by defendant to the plaintiff's son was not a 1938 Leyland Lynx six-wheeler, although Mr. Hodgkinson, senior, thought this was what he was buying. Ile gave the Studebaker vehicle in part exchange and provided.a bankers' draft for the balance of 4600, making a total of 4950.
As witnesses Mr. Hodgkinson and his son had impressed his Lordship and where their evidence differed from that ..of defendant he accepted their version of what happened.
Mr. Hodgkinson was entitled to succeed in the action and there would be judgment in his favour for the amount claimed, 4698 10s., and costs, with interest at 4 per cent, from the date of the issue of the writ.
Judgment was entered accordingly.