For example, in the case of Hong Kong Fir Shipping Co Ltd v Kawasaki Kisen Kaisha Ltd [1962] 2 QB 26, the charterers of a ship informed the owners of their intention to repudiate the charterparty on the grounds that the ship was not 'seaworthy' (the ship was indeed unseaworthy) and that ongoing repairs had caused serious delays (which they certainly had). The owners replied that they would treat the contract as wrongfully repudiated and that they would claim damages accordingly. The Court of Appeal found in favour of the owners: neither the unseaworthiness by itself, nor the delay caused by the owners' breach of contract, entitled the charterers to treat the charterparty as repudiated – the court took the view that the charterers could have been adequately compensated by a claim in damages. Ironically, the owners, despite their own serious breaches of contract, were then entitled to damages for the wrongful repudiation by the charterers.