Harman Patil

A M Bisley and Co Ltd v Thompson

Updated on
Share on FacebookTweet on TwitterShare on LinkedIn
Decided  14 October 1982
Location  New Zealand
Citation(s)  [1982] 2 NZLR 696
End date  October 14, 1982
A M Bisley & Co Ltd v Thompson
Full case name  A M Bisley & Co Ltd v Thompson
Ruling court  Court of Appeal of New Zealand
Judge sittings  Owen Woodhouse, Robin Cooke, Baron Cooke of Thorndon, Clifford Richmond

A M Bisley & Co Ltd v Thompson [1982] 2 NZLR 696 is a cited case in New Zealand regarding express terms in a contract. It highlights one of the exceptions to the parol evidence rule, that is contracts that are partly written, and partly oral contracts.

Contents

Background

Thompson ordered a grain dryer to be installed by A M Bisley on his crop farm so he could harvest his grain crops early.

In the written contract, the "estimated delivery date" was a vague "ASAP", however, it had been orally promised to be installed by the next harvest. However, A M Bisley ordered the grain dryer from an overseas manufacturer late, resulting in the grain dryer not being fully installed on Thompson's farm in time.

This unfortunately left Thompson unable to harvest his barley crop early when a storm destroyed his crop.

As a result of this, Thompson refused to pay Bisley for the grain dryer.

Bisley ultimately sued him for the cost of the grain dryer, and Thompson filed a counterclaim for breach of contract for the loss of his barley crop.

The District Court ruled in favour of both claims, meaning that Thompson did not have to pay Bisley's for the grain dryer.

Both parties appealed.

Held

The Court of appeal dismissed both appeals.

References

A M Bisley & Co Ltd v Thompson Wikipedia


Similar Topics
I Used to Be Darker
Samuel Avital
Eamonn McCann
Topics