Butler Machine Tool Co Ltd quoted a price for a
machine tool of £75,535 on 23 May 1969. Delivery was to be given in ten months.
On the back of the quotation there were terms and conditions which included a
price variation clause which provided for an increase in the price if there was
an increase in the costs. The machine tool was not delivered until November
1970. By that time costs had increased so the sellers claimed an additional sum
of £2,892 as due to them under the price variation clause. The buyers, Ex-Cell-O
Corpn, rejected the excess charge. They said: 'We did not accept the sellers'
quotation as it was. We gave an order for the self-same machine at the
self-same price, but on the back of our order we had our own terms and
conditions. Our terms and conditions did not contain any price variation
clause.' Q The issue before the court
was on whose terms was the contract made?
Ex-Cell-O
Corpn
