## Facts

- Morton agreed to buy 200 quarters of wheat from Lamb at a fixed price per quarter.
- Lamb promised to deliver the wheat at Shardlow (Derbyshire) within one month of the sale.
- Morton alleged he was ready and willing, during and after that month, to receive the wheat at Shardlow.
- Lamb allegedly failed to deliver the wheat within the month or thereafter, despite requests.
- Morton’s pleading did not allege that he tendered the price, or that he was ready and willing to pay upon delivery.

## Issues

1. In a sale requiring payment on delivery, must a buyer suing for non-delivery plead tender of the price (or readiness and willingness to pay at the time and place for delivery) to state a valid claim?

## Decision

- The court arrested judgment for Lamb after a plaintiff’s verdict.
- It held the declaration was legally insufficient because it failed to aver tender of the price or an equivalent allegation.
- The court treated delivery and payment as concurrent acts due at the same time; therefore, the buyer had to plead performance or an offer to perform his own obligation before suing.

## Legal Principles

- When a contract contemplates simultaneous exchange, delivery and payment are concurrent conditions.
- A party seeking to hold the other in breach under concurrent conditions must plead (and ultimately show) performance or tender of its own required performance.
- In an action for non-delivery where payment is due on delivery, alleging readiness to receive the goods alone is insufficient; the buyer must allege tender of the price or readiness and willingness to pay at the stipulated time and place.

## Conclusion

Because payment and delivery were due concurrently, the buyer could not maintain an action for non-delivery without alleging tender of the price (or readiness to pay upon delivery); the omission required arrest of judgment for the seller.


Morton v. Lamb, 7 T.R. 125 (K.B. 1797)