McRae v Commonwealth Disposals Commission [1951]

McRae v Commonwealth Disposals Commission [1951] HCA 79 is a significant Australian contract law case that has relevance to English contract law. The case involves the issue of common mistake about the possibility of performing an agreement.

The Commonwealth Disposals Commission (CDC) sold a shipwreck of a tanker on the Jourmand Reef to the McRae brothers, supposedly containing oil. However, when the McRae brothers went to Samarai, they found no tanker, and it was revealed that there was no such place as the Jourmand Reef. The CDC officer had made a reckless and irresponsible mistake, relying on mere gossip. The McRae brothers had incurred considerable expenses in preparing for a salvage operation. The McRae brothers initiated legal action against the Commission, claiming damages for breach of contract, fraudulent misrepresentation, and negligent failure to disclose.

The High Court of Australia held that McRae succeeded in damages for breach of contract. The Court rejected the argument that the contract was void because the subject matter (the tanker) did not exist. The court distinguished the case from Courturier v Hastie [1856], emphasising that in this case, CDC had actually promised the existence of the tanker and assumed the risk that it did not exist.

The ruling clarified the legal principle that when parties have equal knowledge about the existence of the subject matter and it turns out to be false, it justifies the implication of a condition precedent, rendering the contract void for the failure of the condition precedent. However, in cases where only one party has knowledge of the subject matter, and the other relies on the first party's representation, there is no condition precedent. In such cases, if the first party promises or guarantees the existence of the subject matter, a breach occurs if it does not exist.

Regarding the measure of damages, the court rejected CDC's argument that McRae's expenditure was not wasted. The court held that McRae could claim damages by demonstrating that the expenses were incurred based on CDC's promise of the existence of the tanker, and the fact that there was no tanker made it certain that the expenses would be wasted.

In summary, McRae v Commonwealth Disposals Commission established important principles related to common mistake and the measure of damages in cases where one party promises the existence of the subject matter. The case is relevant not only in Australian contract law but also has implications for English contract law.
Back to blog

UOL Case Bank

Upon joining, you become a valuable UOL student and gain instant access to over 2,100 case summaries. UOL Case Bank is constantly expanding. Speed up your revision with us now.

Subscribe Now

Where are our students from?

Yale University
Council of Europe
Baker Mckenzie 
University of Chicago
Columbia University
New York University
University of Michigan 
INSEAD
University College London (UCL)
London School of Economics (LSE)
King’s College London (KCL)
University of London
University of Manchester
University of Zurich
University of York
Brandeis University
University of Exeter
University of Sheffield
Boston University
University of Washington
University of Leeds
University of Law
Royal Holloway, University of London 
Birkbeck, University of London
SOAS, University of London
University of Kent
University of Hull
Queen’s University Belfast
Toronto Metropolitan University
Hong Kong University of Science and Technology
University of Buckingham
ESSEC Business School

  • Criminal Practice

    Diagrams and Charts

    Our carefully designed diagrams and charts will guide you through complex legal issues.

  • Criminal Law

    Clear and Succinct Definitions

    Key concepts are concisely defined to help you understand legal topics quickly.

  • Property Law

    Statutory Provisions

    Statutory provisions are provided side by side with legal concepts to help you swiftly locate the relevant legislation.

  • Public Law

    Case Summaries

    We have summarised important cases for you so that you don't need to read long and boring cases.

  • Evidence

    Rules and Exceptions

    Rules and exceptions are clearly listed so that you know when a rule applies and when it doesn't.

  • Company Law

    Terminology

    Legal terms and key concepts are explained at the beginning of each chapter to help you learn efficiently.

  • Case Law

    Case law is provided side by side with legal concepts so that you know how legal principles and precedents were established.

  • Law Exam Guide

    Law Essay Guide

    You will learn essential law exam skills and essay writing techniques that are not taught in class.

  • Law Exam Guide

    Problem Question Guide

    We will show you how to answer problem questions step by step to achieve first-class results.

  • Conflict of Laws

    Structured Explanations

    Complex legal concepts are broken down into concise and digestible bullet point explanations.

  • Legal System and Method

    Legal Research

    You will learn legal research techniques with our study guide and become a proficient legal researcher.

  • Jurisprudence and Legal Theory

    Exam-focused

    All essential concepts, principles, and case law are included so that you can answer exam questions quickly.