FACTS: The plaintiff contracted to erect stands at Olympia for the defendant. A week before the exhibition, the plaintiff's workman went on strike, refusing to return to work until a pay demand was met. The plaintiff told the defendant that, unless the defendant paid an additional £4,500, the contract would be cancelled. The plaintiff made it clear that the amount to be paid was to be in addition to the contract price. The defendant paid the amount demanded by the plaintiff so as to get the contract performed: the cancellation of the contract would have caused serious damage to the defendant's economic interests. However, the defendant then deducted this figure from the contract price paid to the plaintiff. The plaintiff then claimed the balance. HELD by the Court of Appeal: Since the cancellation of the contract would have caused serious damage to the defendant's economic interests, they had no choice but to pay the sum demanded by the plaintiff and so it was paid under duress. The plaintiff was therefore not entitled to the extra £4,500 which the defendant had paid under economic duress. Importantly, the defendant acted sufficiently promptly by deducting the extra £4,500 from the contract price thereby avoiding the new agreement – contrast this with the actions of the ship owners in The Atlantic Baron [1979].
Answer
B & S Contracts and Design Ltd v Victor Green Publications Ltd [1984] ICR 419
Tags
#consideration #contract
Question
FACTS: The plaintiff contracted to erect stands at Olympia for the defendant. A week before the exhibition, the plaintiff's workman went on strike, refusing to return to work until a pay demand was met. The plaintiff told the defendant that, unless the defendant paid an additional £4,500, the contract would be cancelled. The plaintiff made it clear that the amount to be paid was to be in addition to the contract price. The defendant paid the amount demanded by the plaintiff so as to get the contract performed: the cancellation of the contract would have caused serious damage to the defendant's economic interests. However, the defendant then deducted this figure from the contract price paid to the plaintiff. The plaintiff then claimed the balance. HELD by the Court of Appeal: Since the cancellation of the contract would have caused serious damage to the defendant's economic interests, they had no choice but to pay the sum demanded by the plaintiff and so it was paid under duress. The plaintiff was therefore not entitled to the extra £4,500 which the defendant had paid under economic duress. Importantly, the defendant acted sufficiently promptly by deducting the extra £4,500 from the contract price thereby avoiding the new agreement – contrast this with the actions of the ship owners in The Atlantic Baron [1979].
Answer
?
Tags
#consideration #contract
Question
FACTS: The plaintiff contracted to erect stands at Olympia for the defendant. A week before the exhibition, the plaintiff's workman went on strike, refusing to return to work until a pay demand was met. The plaintiff told the defendant that, unless the defendant paid an additional £4,500, the contract would be cancelled. The plaintiff made it clear that the amount to be paid was to be in addition to the contract price. The defendant paid the amount demanded by the plaintiff so as to get the contract performed: the cancellation of the contract would have caused serious damage to the defendant's economic interests. However, the defendant then deducted this figure from the contract price paid to the plaintiff. The plaintiff then claimed the balance. HELD by the Court of Appeal: Since the cancellation of the contract would have caused serious damage to the defendant's economic interests, they had no choice but to pay the sum demanded by the plaintiff and so it was paid under duress. The plaintiff was therefore not entitled to the extra £4,500 which the defendant had paid under economic duress. Importantly, the defendant acted sufficiently promptly by deducting the extra £4,500 from the contract price thereby avoiding the new agreement – contrast this with the actions of the ship owners in The Atlantic Baron [1979].
Answer
B & S Contracts and Design Ltd v Victor Green Publications Ltd [1984] ICR 419
If you want to change selection, open original toplevel document below and click on "Move attachment"
Parent (intermediate) annotation
Open it B & S Contracts and Design Ltd v Victor Green Publications Ltd [1984] ICR 419
FACTS: The plaintiff contracted to erect stands at Olympia for the defendant. A week before the exhibition, the plaintiff's workman went on strike, refusing to return to work until a pay
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.