cutter v Powell
Cutter was a sailor, working for Powell. He was
promised 30 guineas for the complete trip, but he
died after he completed ¾ of the trip. The widow sued for adequate compensation.
Problem: Is the widow entitled to a proportionate part of
the agreed sum?
Court: No. Payment of the salary was subject to complete performance. Part performance did not
result in any legal obligation to pay. (discharge by full performance)
Re Moore & Co. v Landauer & Co
The contract required tins of fruit to be packed in cases of 30.
The seller delivered tins packed in cases of 24 instead.
The fruit inside was perfectly fine.
The buyer rejected the whole shipment.
Can the buyer reject the goods even though the fruit quality was fine and the only problem was the packaging?
court: yes The Court of Appeal held that the buyer was entitled to reject the entire consignment.
Because the contract required packing in 30 per case, and that was not done.
So there was no exact performance.
Roberts v Havelock
Roberts agreed to repair a ship. It was not specified when payment was due. After completing some repairs, he asked for some payment but the defendant refused.
Question: Is the claimant entitled to partial payment, or is he
in breach of the terms of the contract?
Court: said that was entitled to payment. Since the contract did not require the
claimant to complete all the work before payment was made, the
Court held that he was not bound to complete the repairs before claiming some payment.
Sumpter v Hedges
A builder was hired to build 2 houses for £565.
They completed some work (worth £333) and then abandoned the project. The owner had to find a
different builder to complete the project.
Question: Are the builders entitled to part payment for the work they carried out?
Court: No. It’s an entire contract. The contractual price cannot be recovered, neither in whole nor in part, until the
contractual work is complete.
Dakin & Co. Ltd v Lee
A builder was hired to repair a house.
The work was completed.
But it was not done perfectly (some defects).
The lower decision said: no exact performance → no payment.
The builder appealed
question: If someone completes the work but does it badly,
can they still get paid?
court: Yes. There is a distinction between failing to complete and completing badly. Here, the contract had been performed, though badly performed, and the plaintiff could recover for the work done, less deductions for the fact that it did not conform to the contract requirements.
Bolton v Mahadeva
A contractor agreed to install central heating for £560.
The system was defective.
The defects would cost £175 to fix (that’s about 31% of the price).
The house was also 10% less energy efficient than agreed.
Lower court said: he could get part payment.
Court of Appeal disagreed.
final decision: The defects were too serious.
So:
No substantial performance.
No entitlement to payment.
The contractor could not recover the contract price.
Planche v Colburn
Planche agreed to write a book for Colburn.
He would be paid £100 upon completion.
Planche started writing the book.
Before he could finish, Colburn cancelled the series.
Colburn then refused to pay anything.
question: If payment was due only on completion, can the writer be paid even though he did not complete the book?
court: yes, Because:
It was the defendant (Colburn) who prevented completion.
The claimant (Planche) was ready and willing to finish.
The failure to complete was not his fault.
Levey & Co v Goldberg
G agreed to buy from L certain pieces of cloth, to
be delivered within a defined period. L withheld
delivery, upon request from G. G later refused to
accept delivery and claimed for damages, L
claimed for breach of contract.
question:Has delivery occurred (and is L entitled to
damages)?
court: Yes. It would be unreasonable to require the seller to complete delivery, when the seller
is aware that the buyer will never pay the price for the goods delivered.
Charles Rickards Ltd v Oppenheim
In 1947 Oppenheim (O) asked Charles Rickards Ltd (CR) to build a custom car body.
CR said it would take about 6–7 months.
So delivery should have been around early 1948. But the car was not ready.
In June 1948, O said: “I will not accept delivery after 25 July 1948.”
=> So he gave a final deadline.
The car was finished October 1948 .
O refused to accept the car or pay.
Question: Could the buyer cancel the contract because of late delivery?
Court: Even if the buyer initially tolerated the delay, he can:
Set a new deadline, and
Give the seller reasonable notice.
If the seller still fails, the buyer can terminate the contract.
=> This means that at first the time was not of essence but because of the new deadline it has become something important within the contract.
Krell v Henry
Henry rented a flat for one day to watch the coronation procession of King Edward VII.
The coronation was postponed because the king became ill.
Court: The court said the contract was frustrated.
Because the main purpose of the contract was to watch the coronation. Since the coronation did not happen, the whole purpose of the contract disappeared.
Herne Bay Steam Boat Co v Hutton
Hutton hired a boat to: watch the naval review, and take a day cruise.
Even if the naval review was postponed, the contract was not
frustrated, as the day cruise could still take place.
Edwinton v Tsavrilis
A ship was hired to help with a salvage operation. The ship was stopped by Pakistani authorities. This caused a delay of 3 months.
Question: Had the contract been frustrated?
Court: No. The court held that the general risk of detention by the port authorities was a foreseeable one. In a time charter, the charterer assumes the risk of delays.
Hochster v De La Tour
Hochster was hired as a courier for a trip starting in June. In May, De La Tour cancelled the trip.
So Hochster was told one month before that the contract would not happen.
Question: Can there be a breach of contract before June, the start date?
court: Yes, there was a breach.
The court said:
If a party clearly refuses to perform before the due date, it is anticipatory breach.
The other party does not need to wait until the performance date.
Sky Petroleum Ltd v V.I.P Petroleum Ltd
SP agreed to buy from VIP a minimum quantity of petroleum per year, for 10 years. VIP tried to
terminate the contract but the scarcity of fuel
supply would have pushed SP in bankruptcy.
Can a court order specific performance in these circumstances?
Yes, even if in “usual” times damages would have been sufficient. Courts are generally very
reluctant to grant specific performance for
contracts for sale of goods.
Johnson v Agnew
The buyer failed to complete the purchase of a
property, despite an order for specific performance. The property was taken back by the bank. The seller asked for damages. Can a court discharge the previous order for specific performance and award damages?
Yes. Where specific performance was ordered but not complied with, damages are still available as an alternative remedy.
Patel v Ali
Ali agreed to sell her house to Patel. In the
meanwhile, she developed cancer, lost her legs, her husband left/was incarcerated, and she relied on children and neighbours for assistance.
Can a court order specific performance in these circumstances? (appeal against lower court decision)
No. The court may refuse specific performance of a contract for the sale of land on the grounds of hardship suffered after the date of
contract, even though the hardship was not caused by the plaintiff and does not relate in any way to the subject matter of the contract.
Shell UK Ltd v Lostock Garage Ltd
Shell applied worse conditions to one of its petrol stations than neighbouring ones. To avoid going out of business, the petrol station breached the exclusivity contract and bought petrol elsewhere.
Can a court order specific performance in these circumstances?
No, because it is a fundamental principle of equity that relief by way of specific performance (or injunction) will only be granted when it is just and equitable to do so.
Coop Insurance Society v Argyll Stores Ltd
The defendants closed a supermarket in breach of their 35-year lease. The claimants sought an order seeking specific performance and/or damages.
Can a court order specific performance in these circumstances?
No, because this would require constant
supervision by the Court, and this would be
impractical. Additionally, specific performance is not a remedy to punish wrongdoing!
Warner Bros Pictures Inc v Nelson
The defendant agreed to render exclusive services for WB. However, she entered into a contract for another filmmaker.
Can a court order a prohibitory injuncion in these circumstances?
Yes, because damages were not an appropriate
remedy, and specific performance could not be
ordered (contract of personal services).
Araci v Fallon
Fallon agreed to ride Araci’s horse when requested for 1 year. He also agreed not to ride rival horses when asked to ride Araci’s horse. Fallon wanted to ride a rival horse at a race.
Can a court order a prohibitory injunction in these circumstances?
Yes, because there was a specific double-barrel
obligation in the agreement. The court was not
forcing Fallon to ride for Araci.
Luganda v Service Hotels
The appellant lived in a serviced room. When the weekly charge was increased and he refused to pay, the “hotel” changed the lock and evicted him.
Can the appellant force the “hotel” to remove the new lock?
Yes, because this was not a contract for a hotel
room, and the legislation that protects tenants did apply to the appellant.
Watts v Morrow
Watts bought a house for £177,500 based on a
survey that the house was in “good conditions”.
The house needed repairs (£33,961) and its true value was £162,500.
What is the proper measure of damage? The
repair costs or the diminution in value?
The diminution in value. Reversing the lower
court’s decision, the CA held that there is no legal basis to award the cost of cure under English law.
Ruxley Constructions v Forsyth
Forsyth asked Ruxley to build a swimming pool on their property. The pool was not up to the
specifications provided, but there was no adverse effect on property’s value or enjoyment.
Should the owner be awarded the cost for
rebuilding the pool (£21,560)?
No. The cost of demolition and rebuilding was
unreasonable, and had to be refused. The client only had a right to be awarded damages for loss of amenity.
Anglia Television v Reed
R, a well-known actor, contracted to appear for A Television to play the lead in a play which they were producing. Shortly afterwards R wrongfully repudiated the contract, and A Television were forced to abandon the production.
Is A TV entitled to the total wasted expenses, or
only to the expenses incurred after the contract was concluded?
Reliance Loss. A TV could claim expenditure
incurred before the contract provided it was
reasonably in the contemplation of the parties as likely to be wasted if the contract were broken.
