Someone recently bought our

students are currently browsing our notes.

X

Rose v Pim

[1953] 2 QB 450

Case summary last updated at 02/01/2020 17:30 by the Oxbridge Notes in-house law team.

Judgement for the case Rose v Pim

P asked D what “feveroles” were. D mistakenly said that they were “horse beans” and D agreed to sell them to P. After paying, P later realised that actually “feveroles” and “horse beans” were not the same thing. However it was “horse beans” and not “feveroles” mentioned in the oral agreements and contracts and therefore in supplying them, D had not breached. 

Have you seen Oxbridge Notes' best Contract Law study materials?

Our law notes have been a popular underground sensation for 10 years:

  • Written by Oxford & Cambridge prize-winning graduates
  • Includes copious adademic commentary in summary form
  • Concise structure relating cases and statutes into an easy-to-remember whole
  • Covers all major cases for LLB exams
  • Satisfaction guaranteed refund policy
  • Recently updated
Contract Law Notes

Contract Law Notes >>