Chandelor v Lopus
| Chandelor v Lopus | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Court | Court of Exchequer |
| Citation(s) | (1603) 79 Eng Rep 3; Cro Jac 4 |
| Keywords | |
| Caveat emptor | |
Chandelor v Lopus (1603) 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).
Facts
A man paid £100 for what he thought was a bezoar 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."
Significance
Though scepticism over the alleged magical 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.
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 Williams [1957] 1 WLR 370
 |
Wikisource has original text related to this article: |
References
- Smith, John William (1888). A Selection of Leading Cases on Various Branches of the Law 1 (9 ed.). Charles H Edson and Co. pp. 319–353.