Wakilii

Nanyuki General Trading Stores v Peterson (Civil Appeal No. 10 of 1948)

East African Court of Appeal · [1948] EACA 9 · 1948 Appeal Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Appeal from decision of H.M. Supreme Court of Kenya
Decision
Appeal dismissed with costs to the respondent

Observed later treatment

No later-treatment classification is recorded for this judgment.

Citator coverage is limited to judgments in the Wakilii corpus and source-matched treatment records. Absence of a signal is not an assertion that the case remains good law.

AI-generated summary. This summary was generated by AI from the full text of the judgment. It may contain errors or omissions—always read the source judgment before relying on it.

Holding

The Court held that the question whether a wife contracts otherwise than as agent is one of fact depending on surrounding circumstances. The evidence was insufficient to rebut the presumption that the respondent acted as agent for her husband. The mere fact that an account is opened in a wife's name does not rebut the presumption of agency absent further evidence showing credit was given exclusively to her. Regarding alcoholic liquor as a necessary, the test is whether the amount is of an extent one might reasonably expect a person in the husband's state of life to require for the household.

Outcome

Appeal dismissed with costs to the respondent

Facts

The appellant trading company supplied groceries and liquor to the respondent, a married woman living with her husband who was a sergeant major in the Royal Engineers. The account was opened in the respondent's name. The appellant's partner, Mr. Aggarwal, knew the husband and would not have given him credit, but opened the account because the respondent said she would settle regularly. The respondent had no separate income. Goods were invoiced in her name and monthly statements sent to her. The husband also ordered goods in his wife's name. Payment was made sometimes by cash and sometimes by cheque, some being the husband's cheques and some from Peer's Industries Ltd. The respondent gave evidence that she was introduced by her husband when opening the account, that she had no private income, and that her husband ordered liquor which was put on the account. The husband paid the bills; the respondent had no banking account or cheque book. The account was closed in December 1946 or January 1947. The appellant sued for Sh. 3,552/12 for goods supplied.

Issues

  1. Whether a wife who opened an account in her own name for household goods contracted otherwise than as agent for her husband.
  2. Whether the presumption that a married woman has authority to pledge her husband's credit for necessaries was rebutted by the circumstances.
  3. Whether alcoholic liquor supplied as part of household goods constituted necessaries suitable to the husband's station in life.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed.
  • Costs awarded to the respondent.

Rules and key headnotes

Contract Law — Married Women — Agency — Presumption of Authority to Pledge Husband's Credit
The question as to whether or not a wife contracted otherwise than as an agent is one of fact depending upon the surrounding circumstances disclosed by the evidence in each particular case.
Contract Law — Married Women — Agency — Rebuttal of Presumption
The mere fact that an account is opened in a wife's name is insufficient to rebut the presumption of authority in the absence of further evidence to show that credit was given to her exclusively.
Contract Law — Married Women — Agency — Tradesman's Mistrust of Husband
Where a tradesman has reasons for being unwilling to give credit to a wife's husband, such reasons cannot avail the tradesman to rebut the presumption of agency if the reason for mistrust was never communicated to the wife.
Contract Law — Necessaries — Alcoholic Liquor — Test for Determining Whether Necessary
In deciding whether alcoholic liquor is a necessary, it should be considered whether the amount of liquor is of an extent which one might reasonably expect a person in the husband's state of life to require for the household.
Family Law — Husband and Wife — Wife's Authority — Household Goods
In cases of orders given by a wife in those departments of her husband's household which she has under her control, the jury may infer that the wife was the agent of her husband until the contrary appears.

Legislation cited (1)

  • Married Women's Property Act 1893 s.1

Cases cited (10)

  • Ramji Dass & Co v McDonald (1935) 16 KLR 103
  • Callot v Nash (1923) 39 TLR 292
  • Paquin v Beauclerk [1906] AC 148
  • Easton v Bartlett (1903) 47 Sol Jo 707
  • Jewsbury v Newbold (1857) 26 LJ Exch 247
  • Harrison v Grady (1865) 13 LTR 369
  • Gray v Cathcart (1922) 38 TLR 562
  • Metcalfe v Shaw (1811) 3 Camp 22
  • Freestone v Butcher (1840) 9 C & P 643
  • Bentley v Griffin (1814) 128 ER 727

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.

Nanyuki General Trading Stores v Peterson (Civil Appeal No. 10 of 1948) [1948] EACA 9 (1 January 1948)
Source: this page presents Wakilii’s issue analysis and metadata for a publicly reported Ugandan judgment. Any AI-generated summary is marked as such. Judgment text is sourced from the Uganda Legal Information Institute (ulii.org). Wakilii is not affiliated with ULII.