When parties are at cross-purposes and the apparent agreement is capable of either interpretation, can there be no binding contract?

British Columbia, Canada


The following excerpt is from Witzke (Guardian of) v. Gliesh, 1995 CanLII 625 (BC SC):

76 Where parties are at cross-purposes and the apparent agreement is capable of either interpretation, there is no agreement. In Raffles v. Wichelhaus (1864), 159 E.R. 375, the defendant purchased cotton from the plaintiff "to arrive ex "Peerless" from Bombay"; the defendant pleaded that he meant a ship called the "Peerless" which sailed from Bombay in October, whereas the plaintiff was not ready to deliver any cotton which arrived by that ship, but only cotton which arrived by another ship called the "Peerless" which sailed from Bombay in December. Although the question being determined was procedural in nature, the court held: There is nothing on the face of the contract to show that any particular ship called the "Peerless" was meant; but the moment it appears that two ships called the "Peerless" were about to sail from Bombay there is a latent ambiguity and parol evidence may be given for the purpose of shewing that the defendant meant one "Peerless," and the plaintiff another. That being so, there was no consensus ad idem, and therefore no binding contract.

Other Questions


If a "social agreement" arising from an earlier decision of a municipal council is treated as a binding contract, is it binding contract? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the test for the construction of a contract where a clause in the contract states that a condition fundamental to the agreement must be met before the contract can be signed? (British Columbia, Canada)
Is a child support agreement entered into between the parties binding the parties to child support? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the legal test to enforce a contract where a party is not a party to the contract? (British Columbia, Canada)
Can a vendor who is late in signing a contract with a third party who has been late in entering into the contract, take advantage of the other party's performance? (British Columbia, Canada)
When a contract is signed and signed, can a party who signed it before and at the time of the contract be found to have misrepresented the agreement? (British Columbia, Canada)
Does contemplation of parties to a further agreement negate the existence of a binding agreement? (British Columbia, Canada)
Does the law of agency apply when one party gives explicit or implicit authority to another party (the principal) to enter contracts with third parties? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the effect of a common law common law agreement where the parties have reached an agreement stating that if the parties reconcile, will the common law rule remain in effect even if they reconcile? (British Columbia, Canada)
How can a court interpret a contract where a party's subsequent conduct is interpreted? (British Columbia, Canada)
X



Alexi white


"The most advanced legal research software ever built."

Trusted by top litigators from across North America.