Chandelor v Lopus
Encyclopedia
Chandelor v Lopus 79 ER 3 is a famous case in the common law
of England
. It stands for the distinction between warranties and mere affirmations and announced the rule of caveat emptor
(buyer beware).
stone. This is a stone that forms in animals' intestinal systems, and was believed to have magical healing properties. The seller said he thought it was a bezoar stone, but he also made clear that he could not be totally certain that it was. The buyer sued for the return of the £100 purchase price.
How the claimant discovered that the bezoar did not work is not discussed in the report.
powers of bezoars may well have been justified, Chandelor long stood as an impediment to any common law development of consumer protection
remedies. Only in the nineteenth century did the law begin to evolve a doctrine of implied warranty
.
Common law
Common law is law developed by judges through decisions of courts and similar tribunals rather than through legislative statutes or executive branch action...
of England
England
England is a country that is part of the United Kingdom. It shares land borders with Scotland to the north and Wales to the west; the Irish Sea is to the north west, the Celtic Sea to the south west, with the North Sea to the east and the English Channel to the south separating it from continental...
. It stands for the distinction between warranties and mere affirmations and announced the rule of caveat emptor
Caveat emptor
Caveat emptor is Latin for "Let the buyer beware". Generally, caveat emptor is the property law doctrine that controls the sale of real property after the date of closing.- Explanation :...
(buyer beware).
Facts
A man paid £100 for what he thought was a bezoarBezoar
A bezoar is a mass found trapped in the gastrointestinal system , though it can occur in other locations. A pseudobezoar is an indigestible object introduced intentionally into the digestive system....
stone. This is a stone that forms in animals' intestinal systems, and was believed to have magical healing properties. The seller said he thought it was a bezoar stone, but he also made clear that he could not be totally certain that it was. The buyer sued for the return of the £100 purchase price.
How the claimant discovered that the bezoar did not work is not discussed in the report.
Judgment
The Exchequer Court held the buyer had no right to his money back, saying "the bare affirmation that it was a bezoar stone, without warranting it to be so, is no cause of action."Signficance
Though scepticism over the alleged magicalMagic (paranormal)
Magic is the claimed art of manipulating aspects of reality either by supernatural means or through knowledge of occult laws unknown to science. It is in contrast to science, in that science does not accept anything not subject to either direct or indirect observation, and subject to logical...
powers of bezoars may well have been justified, Chandelor long stood as an impediment to any common law development of consumer protection
Consumer protection
Consumer protection laws designed to ensure fair trade competition and the free flow of truthful information in the marketplace. The laws are designed to prevent businesses that engage in fraud or specified unfair practices from gaining an advantage over competitors and may provide additional...
remedies. Only in the nineteenth century did the law begin to evolve a doctrine of implied warranty
Implied warranty
In common law jurisdictions, an implied warranty is a contract law term for certain assurances that are presumed to be made in the sale of products or real property, due to the circumstances of the sale. These assurances are characterized as warranties irrespective of whether the seller has...
.
See also
- Cross v Gardner (1689) Cart. 90, Lord Holt CJ held that ‘An affirmation at the time of a sale is a warranty, provided it appears on evidence to be so intended.’
- Heilbut, Symons & Co v Buckleton [1913] AC 30
- Oscar Chess Ltd v WilliamsOscar Chess Ltd v WilliamsOscar Chess Ltd v Williams [1957] 1 WLR 370 is an English contract law case, concerning the difference between a term and a representation.-Facts:...
[1957] 1 WLR 370