Priest v. Last Priest v. Last (the hot-water bottle)
[1903] 2 KB 148 · Court of Appeal (England) · 1903
PrincipleGoods with a single obvious purpose carry an implied condition of fitness for that purpose.
Facts
Priest bought a hot-water bottle from Last, a chemist, asking whether it would stand boiling water. He was told it would stand hot but not boiling water. His wife used it with hot water; after a few days it burst and scalded her. Priest sued for the expense of her treatment.
Held
The Court of Appeal held the seller liable. A hot-water bottle has only one purpose, holding hot water for warming; by buying it from a chemist the purchaser impliedly made that purpose known and relied on the seller, who dealt in such goods, to supply one reasonably fit for it. The bottle was not fit, so the implied condition was broken and the seller was liable in damages.
Loading the full case…