Status Of Terms

Question 1

Poussard v Spiers and Pond

Answer 1

As the lead singer, her performance s crucial to the production and so was a condition. The producers were therefore entitled to repudiate and terminate her contract.

Question 2

Bettini v Gye

Answer 2

The requirement was only ancillary to the main purpose of the contract. The breach only entitled the producers to damages and not a right to repudiate the contract.

Question 3

Hong Kong Fir Shipping Co. v Kawasaki Kisen Kaisha Ltd

Answer 3

Only when the innocent party is substantially deprived of the whole benefit under contract can claim for damages and repudiate the contract, otherwise only entitled to damages.

Question 4

Reardon Smith Line v Yngvar Hansen-Tangen

Answer 4

Oshima 004 > Osaka 354

The court held that the description was not a condition but an innominate term. Since the party had not been substantially depried of the whole benefit, they were only entitled to damages.

Question 5

The Mihalis Angelos

Answer 5

It was clear that the vessel would not be ready to load on time.

The House of Lords used the guidance from statutory terms and the commercial character of the contract and decided that the term was a condition justifying repudiation.

The judges held that in commercial contracts, the predictability and certainty of relations must be the ultimate test.