Routledge v McKay [1954] 1 WLR 615

Material Facts:

The claimant entered negotiations with the defendant for the acquisition of a motorcycle. Although the motorcycle was actually a 1936 model, the claimant was orally informed by the defendant that the motorcycle was a 1942 model. The defendant had obtained this information from the registration documents which were modified by the previous owner. The claimant went away for a week and returned afterwards to complete the purchase. A written agreement was drawn up which did not include the model of the motorcycle and which also ended with the words “it is understood that when the £30 is paid over that this transaction is closed".

Issues:

1. Whether or not the representation on the model of the motorcycle constituted a term of the contract.

Holding:

1. That the representation on the model was not a term of the contract.

Ratio Decidendi:

The court held that since the statement on the model of the motorcycle was excluded from the written contract, the parties had intended to agree or contract on what was contained in the written statement. Further, the lapse of time between the making of the statement and entering into the contract allowed the claimant to check the defendant’s statement on the model.