Bannerman v White – 1861

January 24, 2024
Micheal James

Jurisdiction / Tag(s):

Introduction to Bannerman v White – 1861

In 1861, a significant legal dispute arose between two parties, Bannerman and White, marking a pivotal moment in contract law. To understand the case better, let’s delve into the historical background and the core legal issue that shaped the Bannerman v White case.

Bannerman, the plaintiff, and White, the defendant, found themselves in a disagreement over a contract. It’s crucial to consider the historical context of the 1860s to grasp the dynamics of their interaction. The central legal question at hand pertains to the Sale of Goods Act 1861, a key legislation that governed transactions during that era.

Setting the Stage:

  • John Bannerman, a businessman, agreed to purchase hops from Henry White.
  • A crucial detail: Bannerman specifically emphasized the importance of the hops being untreated with sulphur, as it impacted the quality and taste of the beer he produced.
  • White assured Bannerman that the hops were sulphur-free and the deal proceeded.

A Bittersweet Brew:

  • Upon receiving the hops, Bannerman discovered, to his dismay, that they were indeed treated with sulphur. This significantly affected the quality of his beer and rendered the hops unusable for his intended purpose.
  • Feeling cheated, Bannerman sued White for breach of contract, claiming White’s assurance about the sulphur-free condition was a binding promise that constituted valid consideration for the contract.

The Legal Maelstrom:

The central legal debate focused on whether White’s assurance formed valid consideration:

  • Bannerman: Argued that his insistence on sulphur-free hops was crucial to the deal and that White’s assurance, which induced him to proceed, formed new consideration for the contract, separate from his existing duty to purchase under the initial agreement.
  • White: Claimed that his assurance was merely a representation of the hops’ existing qualities and did not add any new value to the contract. Moreover, Bannerman already had a duty to inspect the hops before accepting them, making his reliance on White’s word irrelevant.

The Verdict and its Ripple Effect:

The court, in a groundbreaking decision, sided with Bannerman. They recognized that while Bannerman had an existing duty to purchase the hops, White’s specific assurance about the sulphur content, made in response to Bannerman’s clearly communicated concern, amounted to additional value and therefore valid consideration for a new contractual term.

The case had a significant impact on contract law, broadening the concept of consideration:

  • Changed circumstances: Agreements can be renegotiated and new promises become enforceable if changes significantly alter the initial deal.
  • Specificity of representation: Representations related to specific, additional qualities add value and can form consideration, even if they relate to existing duties.

Bannerman v White stands as a reminder that contracts are not static documents. In changing circumstances, clear communication and promises made in response to specific concerns can create binding obligations, ensuring fairness and accountability in the dynamic world of agreements.


In concluding our exploration of the Bannerman v White case, it becomes evident that this legal dispute, occurring in 1861, holds enduring significance in the realm of contract law. The case serves as a touchstone for understanding how legal principles, such as those outlined in the Sale of Goods Act 1861, were interpreted and applied during a crucial period in history.

Why Choose Us:

Students are drawn to our Cheap Law Assignments service for various reasons. Affordability is a key factor, as many students face financial constraints during their academic journey. Our commitment to providing quality work at reasonable prices assures students that they can access professional assistance without breaking the bank. Additionally, our track record of delivering well-researched and meticulously crafted law assignments fosters trust among students. The understanding of the unique challenges law students encounter, coupled with our cost-effective approach, creates a compelling proposition that resonates with those seeking reliable and budget-friendly academic support in their legal studies.

Cite This Work

Select a referencing style to export a reference for this article:

All Answers ltd, 'Bannerman v White – 1861' (, September 2012 ) <> accessed 25 April 2024
My, Law, Tutor. (September 2012 ). Bannerman v White – 1861. Retrieved from
"Bannerman v White – 1861." 9 2012. All Answers Ltd. 04 2024 <>.
"Bannerman v White – 1861." MyLawTutor., September 2012. Web. 25 April 2024. <>.
MyLawTutor. September 2012. Bannerman v White – 1861. [online]. Available from: [Accessed 25 April 2024].
MyLawTutor. Bannerman v White – 1861 [Internet]. September 2012. [Accessed 25 April 2024]; Available from:
<ref>{{cite web|last=Tutor |first=MyLaw |url= |title=Bannerman v White – 1861 | |date=September 2012 |accessdate=25 April 2024 |location=UK, USA}}</ref>

Related Cases

Dick Bentley v Harold Smith

. Last modified: April 24, 2024

Introduction to Dick Bentley v Harold Smith The world of contracts can be a complex one, especially when it comes to the interpretation of statements made during negotiations. Dick Bentley Productions Ltd v Harold Smith (Motors) Ltd [1965] stands as a significant case in English contract law, offering valuable insights into the distinction between a […]

Performance Cars v Abraham

. Last modified: April 15, 2024

Introduction to Performance Cars v Abraham Performance Cars Ltd v Abraham (1962) stands as a landmark case in English tort law, specifically regarding the concept of causation in negligence claims. This case study delves into the factual background, the legal issue at stake, the court’s decision and reasoning, and the lasting impact of the case […]

R v Hennessy – 1989

. Last modified: April 15, 2024

Introduction to R v Hennessy – 1989 The criminal justice system grapples with complex issues when a defendant’s actions seem involuntary due to a medical condition. R v Hennessy (1989) stands as a significant case in English law, delving into the boundaries of the defense of automatism in the context of diabetic hypoglycemia. This case […]

go to top