In White and Carter (Councils) Ltd v McGregor Lord Reid qualified his decision by stating that a claimant would not be entitled to affirm and would be confined to a claim in damages for the anticipatory breach if [...]. Although Lord Reid's qualification was not accepted by the other members of the House of Lords, it was applied in the case of Clea Shipping Corporation v Bulk Oil International Ltd, The Alaskan Trader [1984] 1 All ER 129, where the charterers of a ship informed the owners that they had no further use for it but the owners kept the ship at readiness and fully crewed. The court held that the owners were not entitled to the hire money under the contract but only to damages for the charterer's breach as they had no legitimate interest in affirming the contract.
Answer
he had no 'legitimate interest, financial or otherwise', in affirming the contract and continuing with performance
Tags
#contract #discharge #law
Question
In White and Carter (Councils) Ltd v McGregor Lord Reid qualified his decision by stating that a claimant would not be entitled to affirm and would be confined to a claim in damages for the anticipatory breach if [...]. Although Lord Reid's qualification was not accepted by the other members of the House of Lords, it was applied in the case of Clea Shipping Corporation v Bulk Oil International Ltd, The Alaskan Trader [1984] 1 All ER 129, where the charterers of a ship informed the owners that they had no further use for it but the owners kept the ship at readiness and fully crewed. The court held that the owners were not entitled to the hire money under the contract but only to damages for the charterer's breach as they had no legitimate interest in affirming the contract.
Answer
?
Tags
#contract #discharge #law
Question
In White and Carter (Councils) Ltd v McGregor Lord Reid qualified his decision by stating that a claimant would not be entitled to affirm and would be confined to a claim in damages for the anticipatory breach if [...]. Although Lord Reid's qualification was not accepted by the other members of the House of Lords, it was applied in the case of Clea Shipping Corporation v Bulk Oil International Ltd, The Alaskan Trader [1984] 1 All ER 129, where the charterers of a ship informed the owners that they had no further use for it but the owners kept the ship at readiness and fully crewed. The court held that the owners were not entitled to the hire money under the contract but only to damages for the charterer's breach as they had no legitimate interest in affirming the contract.
Answer
he had no 'legitimate interest, financial or otherwise', in affirming the contract and continuing with performance
If you want to change selection, open original toplevel document below and click on "Move attachment"
Parent (intermediate) annotation
Open it d><head>In White and Carter (Councils) Ltd v McGregor Lord Reid qualified his decision by stating that a claimant would not be entitled to affirm and would be confined to a claim in damages for the anticipatory breach if he had no 'legitimate interest, financial or otherwise', in affirming the contract and continuing with performance. Although Lord Reid's qualification was not accepted by the other members of the House of Lords, it was applied in the case of Clea Shipping Corporation v Bulk Oil International Ltd,
Original toplevel document (pdf)
cannot see any pdfs
Summary
status
not learned
measured difficulty
37% [default]
last interval [days]
repetition number in this series
0
memorised on
scheduled repetition
scheduled repetition interval
last repetition or drill
Details
No repetitions
Discussion
Do you want to join discussion? Click here to log in or create user.