Question

Beacon Tours, a Tasmanian tourism business has recently expanded into catering as Vega one of their employees had been sponsored by the business to take a cooking qualification. This was a good addition to the business as feeding and entertaining paying guests has become expected. In October 2019 Beacon Tours, trading under their newly registered business name of Beacon Catering, agreed to cater for a wedding on the 12 January 2020. A term of the contract provided for the food to be delivered to the wedding venue ‘before 7 o’clock’ on the 12 January 2020. Believing that it is an evening wedding Beacon Catering had the food ready and attempted to deliver it to the venue by 6pm on the 12 January 2020. The customer, Canopus, who had contracted them refused to accept the food saying that the food was supposed to be delivered by 7am on the 12 January 2020 and that the wedding took place at midday and that therefore it had already taken place and food had been purchased last minute when Beacon Catering did not show up by 7am. The customer therefore refused to accept delivery due to the lateness of the hour.

Required: Can Beacon Catering sue Canopus for damages for non-acceptance? Is Beacon Catering liable to be sued by Canopus for breach of contract for failure to deliver?

Questions to Consider:

•Is the attempted delivery an issue of tender?

•What has to be established for a good tender?

•What did the contract say about delivery?

•Does the plaintiff’s action in attempting to make the delivery at 7pm satisfy this criterion?

•Note the operation of the Sale of Goods legislation in relation to delivery

Answer 1

Answer:

No, Beacon Catering cannot sue Canopus for damages for non-acceptance, nor Beacon Catering liable to be sued by Canopus for breach of contract for failure to deliver because the contract do not have detail of morning or evening for 7 o’clock. The wedding food delivery contract only has the detail of 7 o clock, but it do not contain the information of 7 am or 7 pm. which has created the problem for the understanding between the two parties of the contract. Thus both cannot blame each other.

• No, the attempted delivery is not an issue of tender, but it was attempted as per the contract unstated terms.

•For an established good tender, it needs to have the clear stated timeline and requirements which can be deliver at the agreed timeline. The timeline of delivery is very essential and important for meeting the delivery requirements.

• The contract say about delivery is that the food needs to be delivered at 7 o clock. The contract do not stated whether the food need to be delivered at 7 pm or 7 am, it only say that 7 o clock. This unstated timeline makes the problem for the delivery as per contract.

• No, the plaintiff’s action in attempting to make the delivery at 7pm, does not satisfy this criterion because the contract does not state that the food to be delivered at 7 pm. Thus it does not meet the criterion. The food needs to be available either at 7 am or 7 pm, then it can meet the delivery criterion.