VARLEY V/S WHIPP. (1900) Q. B. 513.

Case study

Introduction :-
The defendant agreed to buy from the plaintiff a self binder reaping machine,
which the defendant had not seen, but which the plaintiff told him had been new
the previous year and was represented to have only been used to cut 50 or 60
acres. On delivery the machine was rejected by the defendant, who complained
that it was very old and had been mended. He returned the machine and the
plaintiff sued to recover the price.

Facts:-
The facts of this case were as follows:-

Varley and Whipp met in the town of Huddersfield. Varley offered to sell a second-
hand reaping machine to Whipp for £21. Varley said the machine was in the town
of Upjohn. He said the machine was a year old and had only been used to cut 50
or so acres of crops. Whipp had not seen the machine, but agreed to buy it. When
delivered, the machine proved to be a very old one which had obviously been
broken and mended. Whipp returned it and refused to pay the price.

Issue:-
Had the seller delivered what was promised, so that he was entitled to be paid
the agreed price?
Principles of Law:-
The term ‘sale of goods by description’ must apply to all cases where the
purchaser has not seen the goods, but is relying on the description alone. It
applies in a case like the present, where the buyer has never seen the article sold,
but has bought by the description. In that case, by the Sale of Goods Act, 1893,
s.13, there is an implied condition that the goods shall correspond with the
description, which is a different thing from a warranty. The most usual application
of that section no doubt is to the case of unascertained goods.

Decision:-
The seller had not delivered what had been promised.

Judgement:-
The thing sold was a specified machine, but it was bought unseen and it was
identified by description. The description was 'a nearly new reaping machine then
in Upjohn'. The machine delivered was not 'a nearly new machine' and the court
held that it was not in the same class or category of goods as had been described.
The seller had therefore failed to deliver the particular goods as identified in the
contract. This was a breach of the condition, implied into sale contracts by law,
that a seller must deliver the goods as identified by description in the contract.
Failure to deliver goods as identified meant that the buyer did not become the
owner of what had been delivered. Whipp was therefore entitled to reject the
machine and was not obliged to pay for it.