| No search history |
Your feedback is extremely important to us and greatly appreciated.
Tell us what went wrong

Joseph Mandeville, one of the firm of Richard Slade & Co., brought a case against George Holey and Thomas Suckley, joint merchants in trade under the firm of Holey & Suckley. The dispute was over an unpaid debt for goods sold by Richard Slade & Co. to Holey & Suckly. The Supreme Court found that there had been no breach on either side and that both parties were equally liable for any damages incurred due to non-payment or delay in payment. Furthermore, it was determined that as long as reasonable efforts were made by each party to fulfill their obligations then neither could be held responsible for any losses suffered from delays or defaults in payments. This ruling set a precedent which has since been used when determining liability between two parties involved in commercial transactions where one is unable to pay its debts due to circumstances beyond its control.
In the case of Joseph Mandeville, one of the firm Richard Slade & Co., vs. George Holey and Thomas Suckley, joint merchants in trade under the firm of Holey & Suckley, Justice Story delivered a dissenting opinion. He argued that although there was no express contract between parties to pay interest on money due for goods sold and delivered by them, yet it may be implied from circumstances attending such transactions. In this particular case he believed that an agreement had been made between both parties which included payment with interest at six percent per annum after sixty days if not paid before then. Furthermore he stated that even if there were no express or implied agreement as to interest payments being due upon defaulted payments then common law would allow for recovery of damages caused by nonpayment including reasonable compensation for loss occasioned by delay in payment. Therefore Justice Story concluded that plaintiff should have been allowed to recover damages from defendants based on their failure to make timely payments according to agreed terms or otherwise according to common law principles governing contracts involving sale and delivery of goods