Case 9. A Purchase of Modern Antiquities

Caius, a wealthy Catholic, when he was building a new house for himself, bought several ornaments (old china, miniatures, curios) for six hundred pounds sterling. He immediately paid the seller two hundred pounds, being about to pay afterward what remained. In the meantime, however, he heard from a certain expert that several of the said ornaments were modern and counterfeit, and that all of them were not worth more than one hundred and fifty pounds. He therefore determined not to pay the remaining sum to the seller, who, however, protested strenuously, saying that the buyer had inspected the things with his own eyes and had freely agreed upon the price. Caius wishes to know whether he can safely stand in conscience by his determination not to pay. Hence it is asked:

1. What is the contract of buying and selling?

2. What is a just price?

3. How is that maxim of our law—Caveat emptor—to be interpreted, especially with respect to the forum internum?

4. What is to be said of the case?

1. This question was answered above, p. 303.

2. See the answer to this question above, p. 304.

3. How is the legal axiom Caveat emptor to be interpreted especially for the forum of conscience?

In English law the axiom Caveat emptor means that where an article is offered for sale and is open for inspection to the buyer, the buyer is not permitted to complain after the bargain has been struck that the defects, if any existed, were not pointed out to him. He had the opportunity of examining the article, and he should have found out its defects for himself. In the forum of conscience also the axiom may be applied to accidental and manifest defects which ordinary inspection should have revealed. It can not be applied to substantial defects which make the article useless for the known purpose of the buyer, nor to the absence of qualities which were the motive of the contract.

4. The case. Caius paid £200 down for some old china, miniatures, and curios for his new house, and contracted to pay £400 more at a future date. In the meanwhile he learned from an expert that many of the articles were not genuine but fictitious, and not worth more than £150. He therefore refused to pay the outstanding £400, though the seller vigorously protested on the ground that the buyer had examined the articles and freely contracted to pay the sum agreed upon. Caius wants to know if he is safe in conscience in refusing to pay more than he has done.

Yes; he is. Many of the articles are not what they were represented to be, and for what he bought them, so that he would have a right to rescind the contract and claim the damages. The price that he has already paid is a very good one for the whole lot, and the seller should be satisfied with it.