Rex v Hemani Provision Stores
Rex v Hemani Provision Stores (Criminal Appeal No. 176 of 1951) [1951] EACA 274 (1 January 1951)
The Court held that the sale of goods was completed upon delivery and acceptance at the invoice price, which reflected the lawful maximum price for price-controlled goods. The subsequent endorsement demanding a 10 per cent surcharge was made after the completion of the sale and did not form part of the contract or constitute an attempt to sell above the maximum price. There was no misrepresentation or undisclosed condition at the time of sale, and the demand for extra payment was gratuitous and without consideration. Accordingly, the conduct did not offend against regulations 11 (1) or 16 of…
Source excerpt
- Price Control Regulations
- Sale Of Goods
- Contract Completion
- Illegal Conditions Of Sale