Termination for Breach

Question 0

The Hannah Blumenthal (1983)

Answer 0

A contract can be ended by implication arising from conduct.

Question 1

British Russian Gazette v Associated Newspaper Ltd (1933)

Answer 1

If one party has already performed their side of a contract before discharge by agreement, accord and satisfaction is necessary.

Question 2

The Mihalis Angelos (1970)

Answer 2

Claimant agreed to lease a ship from the defendant at a specified date, the ship was not ready for this date, held: the ready to load date was a condition - necessary for legal certainty.

Question 3

Hong Kong Fir v Kawasaki (1962)

Answer 3

Ship was chartered for 24 months, was not available for 5 months due to damages, was held that this did not amount to substantial deprivation of the whole benefit, breach was not repudiatory.

Question 4

The Hansa Nord (1976)

Answer 4

Some of a load of goods was damaged, buyer rejected load, seller sold to a third party cheaply, the original buyer then bought the goods from this party, held: no repudiatory breach, the buyer shouldn’t have terminated, a price reduction would have been sufficient.

Question 5

Arcos v Ranaason (1933)

Answer 5

Implied term found that goods must match their description.

Question 6

Bunge Corporation v Tradax (1981)

Answer 6

Buyer was required to give 15 days notice for loading of goods, only gave 13, court held it was a condition, necessary for legal certainty.

Question 7

Schuler v Wickman

Answer 7

Agreed weekly visits would occur, called it a condition in the contract, whole contract was examined, held: it wouldn’t be reasonable for the term to be held to be a condition.

Question 8

Lombard North Central v Butterworth (1987)

Answer 8

Contract for lease of computer contained clause requiring prompt payment, held to be a condition, parties had demonstrated that it was an essential term.

Question 9

Poussard v Spiers (1876)

Answer 9

P was an opera singer engaged to perform for 3 months, she missed the first few days due to illness and was fired, held: performance of the first few days was extremely important, could be a condition.

Question 10

Bettini v Gye (1876)

Answer 10

Opera singer missed a few days of rehearsals, not a condition, they did not go to the core of the contract.

Question 11

The Santa Clara (1996)

Answer 11

Communication need not be in language of acceptance, may be implicit in conduct.

Question 12

Photo Production v Securicor (1980)

Answer 12

Company had exclusion clause in their contract excluding liability for damages, it was argued that contract (including exclusion clause) ceased to exist when it was broken, held contract still existed, secondary obligations were now in force.

Question 13

White & Carter v McGregor (1962)

Answer 13

One party wished to end the contract, committed repudiatory breach, the other party affirmed the contract as punishment, held they could do this, affirming only not an option if the contract requires cooperation or there is no legitimate interest financial or otherwise in affirming.

Question 14

Attica v Ferrostaal (1976)

Answer 14

Ship was rented but not returned due to damages, leaser was willing to pay damages rather than return the ship, held: there was no legitimate interest in requiring the ship to be returned.

Question 15

Hochster v De La Tour

Answer 15

On 11 May a contract was cancelled (before performance), court action was taken on 22 May, held: damages could be claimed from 11 May when the anticipatory breach occurred

Question 16

Woodar v Wimpey

Answer 16

Defendant tried to terminate a contract based on a termination clause that turned out not to exist, held: there was no anticipatory breach, simply a reliance by a party on a clause that didn’t exist.