{"id":5944,"date":"2018-03-07T09:27:00","date_gmt":"2018-03-07T09:27:00","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"2019-06-27T12:39:59","modified_gmt":"2019-06-27T12:39:59","slug":"sterling-hydraulics-v-dichtomatik","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/cases\/sterling-hydraulics-v-dichtomatik.php","title":{"rendered":"Sterling Hydraulics v Dichtomatik"},"content":{"rendered":"

Sterling Hydraulics Ltd v Dichtomatik Ltd [2006] EWHC 2004<\/strong><\/p>\n

Acknowledgement of order; whether amounted to counter-offer incorporating new terms<\/p>\n

Facts<\/h3>\n

Sterling Hydraulics Ltd (SHL) manufactured hydraulic valves and custom manifold blocks for use in trailers. SHL ordered seals from Dichtomatik Ltd (DL) stipulating they had to be made from a specific material which was suitable for use with brake fluid. DL\u2019s acknowledgement of the order stated delivery was subject to their standard terms of sale, but these terms were not supplied until after the seals had been delivered. The seals were not made from the stipulated material, and they failed. SHL brought a claim for breach of contract.<\/p>\n

Issues<\/h3>\n

DL contended the acknowledgement of order documentation amounted to a counter-offer incorporating their own terms into the contract. Their terms contained a clause which limited their liabilities to the value of defective goods. They argued this clause was incorporated into the contract when SHL accepted the terms of the offer by accepting delivery of the seals. SHL argued the placing of the order amounted to the material offer, and DL\u2019s acknowledgement of the offer amounted to the requisite acceptance on SHL\u2019s terms. SHL contended DL\u2019s order acknowledgement did not amount to a counter offer because there had been insufficient notice provided for the terms to have been incorporated into the contract. They sought damages for the cost of the seals and the cost of compensating their purchaser.<\/p>\n

Decision\/Outcome<\/h3>\n

DL had not successfully incorporated its terms into the contract. DL failed to make it sufficiently clear in the acknowledgement documentation what the proposed terms were, and the contract was formed when the order was acknowledged. Had DL\u2019s terms been successfully incorporated, apart from the requirement that hidden defects should be reported within a week of delivery, DL\u2019s terms were reasonable for the purposes of the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977<\/strong>.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

DL contended the acknowledgement of order documentation amounted to a counter-offer incorporating their own terms into the contract.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[85],"class_list":["post-5944","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-cases","tag-uk-law"],"yoast_head":"\nSterling Hydraulics v Dichtomatik | LawTeacher.net<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"DL contended the acknowledgement of order documentation amounted to a counter-offer incorporating their own terms into the contract.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/cases\/sterling-hydraulics-v-dichtomatik.php\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_GB\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Sterling Hydraulics v Dichtomatik\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"DL contended the acknowledgement of order documentation amounted to a counter-offer incorporating their own terms into the contract.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/cases\/sterling-hydraulics-v-dichtomatik.php\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"LawTeacher.net\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LawTeacherNet\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:author\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LawTeacherNet\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"-0001-11-30T00:00:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/LT-large-logo.webp\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1920\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"1080\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/webp\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"LawTeacher\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@LawTeacherNet\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@LawTeacherNet\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"LawTeacher\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Estimated reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"2 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"ScholarlyArticle\",\"@id\":\"http:\/\/64.226.118.242:8001\/cases\/sterling-hydraulics-v-dichtomatik.php#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"http:\/\/64.226.118.242:8001\/cases\/sterling-hydraulics-v-dichtomatik.php\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"LawTeacher\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/#\/schema\/person\/b99962c073c877c4ab8ee3d2486cd56e\"},\"headline\":\"Sterling Hydraulics v Dichtomatik\",\"datePublished\":\"-0001-11-30T00:00:00+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"http:\/\/64.226.118.242:8001\/cases\/sterling-hydraulics-v-dichtomatik.php\"},\"wordCount\":316,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/#organization\"},\"keywords\":[\"UK Law\"],\"articleSection\":[\"Case Summaries\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-GB\"},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"http:\/\/64.226.118.242:8001\/cases\/sterling-hydraulics-v-dichtomatik.php\",\"url\":\"http:\/\/64.226.118.242:8001\/cases\/sterling-hydraulics-v-dichtomatik.php\",\"name\":\"Sterling Hydraulics v Dichtomatik | LawTeacher.net\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"-0001-11-30T00:00:00+00:00\",\"description\":\"DL contended the acknowledgement of order documentation amounted to a counter-offer incorporating their own terms into the contract.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"http:\/\/64.226.118.242:8001\/cases\/sterling-hydraulics-v-dichtomatik.php#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-GB\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"http:\/\/64.226.118.242:8001\/cases\/sterling-hydraulics-v-dichtomatik.php\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"http:\/\/64.226.118.242:8001\/cases\/sterling-hydraulics-v-dichtomatik.php#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Sterling Hydraulics v Dichtomatik\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/\",\"name\":\"Law Teacher\",\"description\":\"The Law Essay Professionals\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"LawTeacher.net\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-GB\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Law Teacher\",\"alternateName\":\"LawTeacher.net\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-GB\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/LT-logo.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/LT-logo.jpg\",\"width\":250,\"height\":250,\"caption\":\"Law Teacher\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LawTeacherNet\/\",\"https:\/\/x.com\/LawTeacherNet\",\"https:\/\/api.whatsapp.com\/send\/?phone=447723491966&text&type=phone_number&app_absent=0\"],\"description\":\"Law Teacher provides academic writing services for law students throughout the world.\",\"email\":\"contact@lawteacher.net\",\"telephone\":\"+44 115 966 7966\",\"numberOfEmployees\":{\"@type\":\"QuantitativeValue\",\"minValue\":\"51\",\"maxValue\":\"200\"}},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/#\/schema\/person\/b99962c073c877c4ab8ee3d2486cd56e\",\"name\":\"LawTeacher\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-GB\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4fdfab0a9ef25209f111018ecc8a983e19e57c5066a9277217a119582ccbeed3?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4fdfab0a9ef25209f111018ecc8a983e19e57c5066a9277217a119582ccbeed3?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"LawTeacher\"},\"description\":\"LawTeacher.net is the UK's leading provider of academic legal support, offering both writing services and an extensive collection of law study resources for students in the UK and overseas. Founded in 2003 by Grey's Inn graduate Barclay Littlewood, the Company was built on a commitment to excellence, with unique guarantees and a high standard of service from day one. The team includes over 500 UK legally qualified writing experts, with many practising solicitors and barristers, and several former lecturers.\",\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\",\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LawTeacherNet\",\"https:\/\/x.com\/LawTeacherNet\",\"https:\/\/gravatar.com\/lawteacherprofile\"],\"knowsAbout\":[\"Contract Law\",\"Criminal Law\",\"Constitutional and Administrative Law\",\"EU Law\",\"Tort Law\",\"Property Law\",\"Equity and Trusts\",\"Jurisprudence\",\"Company Law\",\"Commercial Law\",\"Family Law\",\"Human Rights Law\",\"Employment Law\",\"Evidence\",\"Public International Law\",\"Legal Research and Methods\",\"Dispute Resolution\",\"Business Law and Practice\",\"Civil Litigation\",\"Criminal Litigation\",\"Professional Conduct\",\"Taxation\",\"Wills and Administration of Estates\",\"Solicitors\u2019 Accounts\"],\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/author\/lawteacher\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Sterling Hydraulics v Dichtomatik | LawTeacher.net","description":"DL contended the acknowledgement of order documentation amounted to a counter-offer incorporating their own terms into the contract.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/cases\/sterling-hydraulics-v-dichtomatik.php","og_locale":"en_GB","og_type":"article","og_title":"Sterling Hydraulics v Dichtomatik","og_description":"DL contended the acknowledgement of order documentation amounted to a counter-offer incorporating their own terms into the contract.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/cases\/sterling-hydraulics-v-dichtomatik.php","og_site_name":"LawTeacher.net","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LawTeacherNet\/","article_author":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LawTeacherNet","article_published_time":"-0001-11-30T00:00:00+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1920,"height":1080,"url":"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/LT-large-logo.webp","type":"image\/webp"}],"author":"LawTeacher","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@LawTeacherNet","twitter_site":"@LawTeacherNet","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"LawTeacher","Estimated reading time":"2 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"ScholarlyArticle","@id":"http:\/\/64.226.118.242:8001\/cases\/sterling-hydraulics-v-dichtomatik.php#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"http:\/\/64.226.118.242:8001\/cases\/sterling-hydraulics-v-dichtomatik.php"},"author":{"name":"LawTeacher","@id":"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/#\/schema\/person\/b99962c073c877c4ab8ee3d2486cd56e"},"headline":"Sterling Hydraulics v Dichtomatik","datePublished":"-0001-11-30T00:00:00+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"http:\/\/64.226.118.242:8001\/cases\/sterling-hydraulics-v-dichtomatik.php"},"wordCount":316,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/#organization"},"keywords":["UK Law"],"articleSection":["Case Summaries"],"inLanguage":"en-GB"},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"http:\/\/64.226.118.242:8001\/cases\/sterling-hydraulics-v-dichtomatik.php","url":"http:\/\/64.226.118.242:8001\/cases\/sterling-hydraulics-v-dichtomatik.php","name":"Sterling Hydraulics v Dichtomatik | LawTeacher.net","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/#website"},"datePublished":"-0001-11-30T00:00:00+00:00","description":"DL contended the acknowledgement of order documentation amounted to a counter-offer incorporating their own terms into the contract.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"http:\/\/64.226.118.242:8001\/cases\/sterling-hydraulics-v-dichtomatik.php#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-GB","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["http:\/\/64.226.118.242:8001\/cases\/sterling-hydraulics-v-dichtomatik.php"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"http:\/\/64.226.118.242:8001\/cases\/sterling-hydraulics-v-dichtomatik.php#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Sterling Hydraulics v Dichtomatik"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/#website","url":"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/","name":"Law Teacher","description":"The Law Essay Professionals","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/#organization"},"alternateName":"LawTeacher.net","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-GB"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/#organization","name":"Law Teacher","alternateName":"LawTeacher.net","url":"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-GB","@id":"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/LT-logo.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/LT-logo.jpg","width":250,"height":250,"caption":"Law Teacher"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LawTeacherNet\/","https:\/\/x.com\/LawTeacherNet","https:\/\/api.whatsapp.com\/send\/?phone=447723491966&text&type=phone_number&app_absent=0"],"description":"Law Teacher provides academic writing services for law students throughout the world.","email":"contact@lawteacher.net","telephone":"+44 115 966 7966","numberOfEmployees":{"@type":"QuantitativeValue","minValue":"51","maxValue":"200"}},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/#\/schema\/person\/b99962c073c877c4ab8ee3d2486cd56e","name":"LawTeacher","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-GB","@id":"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4fdfab0a9ef25209f111018ecc8a983e19e57c5066a9277217a119582ccbeed3?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4fdfab0a9ef25209f111018ecc8a983e19e57c5066a9277217a119582ccbeed3?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"LawTeacher"},"description":"LawTeacher.net is the UK's leading provider of academic legal support, offering both writing services and an extensive collection of law study resources for students in the UK and overseas. Founded in 2003 by Grey's Inn graduate Barclay Littlewood, the Company was built on a commitment to excellence, with unique guarantees and a high standard of service from day one. The team includes over 500 UK legally qualified writing experts, with many practising solicitors and barristers, and several former lecturers.","sameAs":["https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net","https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LawTeacherNet","https:\/\/x.com\/LawTeacherNet","https:\/\/gravatar.com\/lawteacherprofile"],"knowsAbout":["Contract Law","Criminal Law","Constitutional and Administrative Law","EU Law","Tort Law","Property Law","Equity and Trusts","Jurisprudence","Company Law","Commercial Law","Family Law","Human Rights Law","Employment Law","Evidence","Public International Law","Legal Research and Methods","Dispute Resolution","Business Law and Practice","Civil Litigation","Criminal Litigation","Professional Conduct","Taxation","Wills and Administration of Estates","Solicitors\u2019 Accounts"],"url":"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/author\/lawteacher"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5944","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=5944"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5944\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=5944"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=5944"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=5944"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}