Top Qs
Timeline
Chat
Perspective
Rattlesdene v Grunestone
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Remove ads
Rattlesdene v Grunestone (YB 10 Edw II (54 SS) 140) is a 1317 case in English law.
Facts
The plaintiff claimed that the defendant had sold him a bottle of wine but, before delivery, drew off much of the wine and replaced it with salt water.[1]
Commentary
The academics Mark Lunney and Ken Oliphant argue that in reality the case was likely the result of a shipping accident with the facts fabricated to allow the court to circumvent the vi et armis requirements which required that loss be suffered 'with force and arms' if a claim was to be brought.[2]
See also
References
Wikiwand - on
Seamless Wikipedia browsing. On steroids.
Remove ads