## Facts

- A buyer contracted with a farmer to purchase 200 tons of “Regent” potatoes at a set price per ton.
- The contract specified that the potatoes were to be grown on the farmer’s own identified land and delivered at a named railway station during specified months, with payment as removed.
- Before harvest, an unforeseen potato disease damaged the crop on the specified land without the farmer’s fault and without reasonable means of prevention.
- The farmer harvested and delivered only about 79–80 tons; the buyer accepted that delivery.
- The buyer sued for damages for nondelivery of the remaining quantity.

## Issues

1. Whether a seller who contracts to supply a fixed quantity of goods “to be grown” on specific land is liable in damages for short delivery when the crop partially fails without the seller’s fault.
2. Whether the contract is properly construed as limited to goods produced from the identified source, so that failure of that source discharges performance to the extent of the failure.

## Decision

- The Court of Appeal affirmed judgment for the seller.
- The court construed the agreement as a contract for potatoes to be grown on the identified land, not a general promise to supply 200 tons from any source.
- Because the crop’s partial failure occurred without the seller’s fault and made full delivery from that source impossible, the seller was excused from delivering more than the land actually produced.
- The seller was not required to obtain substitute potatoes from the market to make up the deficiency.
- The seller was not liable in damages for the shortfall beyond the quantity harvested and delivered.

## Legal Principles

- When a contract for sale is limited to goods to be produced from a specific, identified source, the continued existence and sufficient output of that source is treated as an implied condition of performance.
- If, without the promisor’s fault, the specified source perishes or fails so that performance as described becomes impossible, the duty to perform is discharged to the extent of the impossibility.
- A fixed quantity term does not convert an identified-source contract into a general supply obligation requiring procurement from alternative sources when the specified source fails without fault.

## Conclusion

A seller who agrees to supply a stated quantity of goods “to be grown” on identified land is excused from full delivery when an unforeseen, faultless crop failure makes performance from that source impossible; the seller’s duty is limited to the actual yield and no damages are owed for the shortfall.


Howell v. Coupland, (1876) 1 Q.B.D. 258 (C.A.)