Do you want BuboFlash to help you learning these things? Or do you want to add or correct something? Click here to log in or create user.



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 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, 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 [...].
Answer
they had no legitimate interest in affirming the contract

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 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, 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 [...].
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 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, 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 [...].
Answer
they had no legitimate interest in affirming the contract
If you want to change selection, open original toplevel document below and click on "Move attachment"

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
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 <span>they had no legitimate interest in affirming the contract.<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs

Summary

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised 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.