Hadley v. Baxendale
Court of Exchequer
156 Eng. Rep. 145 (1854)
- Written by Megan Petersen, JD
Facts
Hadley (plaintiff) owned and operated a corn mill in Gloucester. The crank shaft that operated the mill broke and halted all mill operations. To obtain a new shaft, Hadley was required to ship the old crank shaft to Joyce & Co., an engineering company in Greenwich, to be used as a model for a new shaft. Hadley contacted Pickford & Co. (Pickford), a shipping company owned by Baxendale (defendant), and obtained shipping information for the crank shaft. Hadley was informed that if the crank shaft was delivered to Pickford before noon, it would be shipped and delivered to Greenwich the following day. The following day, Hadley delivered the crank shaft to Pickford before noon and paid the shipping price in full. However, Pickford negligently delayed shipping, and the crank shaft was not delivered until several days later. As a result, Hadley obtained the new crank shaft several days later than expected, during which time the mill remained closed. Hadley brought suit against Baxendale for damages, including lost profits from the delay. The jury awarded Hadley lost profits, and Baxendale appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Crompton, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 788,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,200 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.