Coppen v Moore (No 1) [1898] 2 QB 300 – MMA 1887 – (TDA).
1) the MMA did not apply to a trade description which was wholly verbal.
2) a description written on an invoice, before property in the goods passed, was a trade description.
3) whether employer can be punished for unauthorized act of his servant to be considered in Coppen v Moore (No 2).
undefined: unpaid
Related case digests
- Coppen v Moore (No 2) [1898] 2 QB 306 - MMA.
- strict liability – exception to mens rea principle - vicarious liability of employer. - legislation may make employer criminally liable for acts of employees acting in course of their employment.