Misplaced Pages

Routledge v McKay

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.

This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed.
Find sources: "Routledge v McKay" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR (January 2021) (Learn how and when to remove this message)

Routledge v McKay is a 1954 English contract law case, concerning the difference between a term and a representation.

Facts

The claimant bought a 1936 Douglas motorcycle outfit in a part-exchange deal which required him to pay a balance of £30. The registration documents falsely stated that it was a 1942 model, as a previous owner had earlier modified the bike and had wrongly registered it as a 1960. The current seller had, during negotiations, mentioned the 1942 date, but the actual deal only took place several days later.

Judgment

Even though the logbook clearly stated the bike's year as 1960, that statement was a mere representation and not a contractual term; nor was there any misrepresentation in this transaction. Furthermore, neither the owner who had made the false registration nor any of the intervening owners were liable to the current owner. The delay between the negotiations and the contract was a contributing factor to the decision.

Analysis

A term is an integral part of an agreement, whereas a representation is a pre-contractual statement which remains non-contractual unless and until it is adopted as a term. During negotiations, in the process of offer and acceptance, a representation may take the form of (i) an invitation to treat, (ii) a request for information, or (iii) a statement of intention; but once a valid contract is formed these distinctions serve no further purpose.

See also

Incorporating contract terms
Oscar Chess Ltd v Williams EWCA Civ 5
Parker v South Eastern Railway Company (1877) 2 CPD 416
L'Estrange v F Graucob Ltd 2 KB 394
Chapelton v Barry UDC 1 KB 532
J Spurling Ltd v Bradshaw EWCA Civ 3
Olley v Marlborough Court 1 KB 532
McCutcheon v David MacBrayne Ltd UKHL 4
Henry Kendall Ltd v William Lillico Ltd 2 AC 31
Thornton v Shoe Lane Parking EWCA Civ 2
Hollier v Rambler Motors Ltd EWCA Civ 12
Interfoto v Stiletto EWCA Civ 6
O’Brien v MGN Ltd EWCA Civ 1279
Incorporation of terms in English law

References

  1. Routledge v McKay 1954 1 WLR 615
  2. Fisher v Bell 1 QB 394
  3. Clifton v Palumbo 1944
  4. Re Fickus 1900


Stub icon

This case law article is a stub. You can help Misplaced Pages by expanding it.

Categories: