Harvey v Facey
a) An appellant is a person appealing to Higher Court from decision of Lower Court1. In this case, Harvey is an appellant appealing to Privy Council.
b) A respondent is a person against whom an action is raised. In this case, the respondent is Facey.
c) The following is taken from the case of Harvey v Facey2. There was a dispute between the two parties over the sale of a property named Bumper Hall Pen. The appellants, Harvey and his wife, telegraphed Facey a message stating ‘’Will you sell us Bumper Hall Pen? Telegraph lowest price – answer paid.’’ Facey answered by telegram, ‘’Lowest price for Bumper Hall Pen £900.’’ Harvey answered by telegram, ‘’We agree to buy bumper Hall Pen for the nine hundred pounds asked by you. Please send us your title deed in order that we may get early possession.’’ Facey made no reply to that. Harvey sued Facey for specific performance of an alleged contract in writing and for an injunction to restrain the town of Kingston from taking conveyance of the property (Facey was previously engaged in negotiations to sell the land to Kingston). The trial court and J. Curran held that there was no contract, as the final telegram was not the acceptance of an offer to sell. It was itself an offer to buy, the acceptance to which must be expressed and could not be implied. When appealed, Supreme Court of Jamaica reversed the decisions. The Court declared that a binding agreement of the sale and purchase of the property has been proved between the two parties, however, the appellants failed to establish that L.M.Facey had power to sell the property without the concurrence of his wife. Therefore, the agreement could not be performed. Harvey appealed to the judicial committee of Privy Council. Lord Morris and the court stated that ‘’the mere statement of the lowest price at which the vendor would sell contains no implied contract that price to the persons making the inquiry’’. The decision made was to reverse the judgement of the Supreme Court and
b) A respondent is a person against whom an action is raised. In this case, the respondent is Facey.
c) The following is taken from the case of Harvey v Facey2. There was a dispute between the two parties over the sale of a property named Bumper Hall Pen. The appellants, Harvey and his wife, telegraphed Facey a message stating ‘’Will you sell us Bumper Hall Pen? Telegraph lowest price – answer paid.’’ Facey answered by telegram, ‘’Lowest price for Bumper Hall Pen £900.’’ Harvey answered by telegram, ‘’We agree to buy bumper Hall Pen for the nine hundred pounds asked by you. Please send us your title deed in order that we may get early possession.’’ Facey made no reply to that. Harvey sued Facey for specific performance of an alleged contract in writing and for an injunction to restrain the town of Kingston from taking conveyance of the property (Facey was previously engaged in negotiations to sell the land to Kingston). The trial court and J. Curran held that there was no contract, as the final telegram was not the acceptance of an offer to sell. It was itself an offer to buy, the acceptance to which must be expressed and could not be implied. When appealed, Supreme Court of Jamaica reversed the decisions. The Court declared that a binding agreement of the sale and purchase of the property has been proved between the two parties, however, the appellants failed to establish that L.M.Facey had power to sell the property without the concurrence of his wife. Therefore, the agreement could not be performed. Harvey appealed to the judicial committee of Privy Council. Lord Morris and the court stated that ‘’the mere statement of the lowest price at which the vendor would sell contains no implied contract that price to the persons making the inquiry’’. The decision made was to reverse the judgement of the Supreme Court and