First, the law might adopt a test for legitimate rejection that hinges on there being seriously adverse consequences from the viewpoint of the buyer. If the Hong Kong Fir Shipping case were to set a general standard for withdrawal, the test would be whether the sellers' breach deprived the buyers of substantially the whole benefit of the bargain (which it manifestly did not on the facts of Arcos). In fact, following the decision in the Hong Kong Fir Shipping case, there was a period when the test was employed precisely in order to block what were seen as bad faith rejections (perhaps the best example is the decision of the Court of Appeal in Cehave NV v Bremer Handels GmbH: The Hansa Nord [1976] QB 44).