North Ocean Shipping Co Ltd v Hyundai Construction Co Ltd and Another (The Atlantic Baron) [1979] QB 705
Facts: By a shipbuilding contract the builders agreed to build a tanker for the owners, for $30,950,000 payable in five instalments. The contract required the builders to open a reverse letter of credit for the repayment of instalments in the event of their default. After the first instalment had been paid, the dollar was devalued and the builders threatened not to deliver unless the remaining instalments were increased by 10 per cent. The owners were advised that there was no legal basis for the claim, but were anxious that they might lose a favourable charter with Shell if the ship were not finished on time, and in a telex dated 28 June 1973, they agreed to the increased payments, ‘to maintain an amicable relationship and without prejudice to our rights.’ The builders did this and delivered the tanker; the owners took delivery without protest. Some eight months later the owners claimed the return of the 10 per cent extra. It was suggested that they did not seek the return of the money sooner because they were concerned about the delivery of a sister ship (The Atlantic Baroness) also being built for them. However, the arbitrators found that this fear was groundless. It was held that although the agreement to pay the extra money might initially have been voidable for economic duress, the fact that the shipping company waited [...]before taking any action, meant they had affirmed it.
Answer
eight months
Tags
#consideration #contract
Question
North Ocean Shipping Co Ltd v Hyundai Construction Co Ltd and Another (The Atlantic Baron) [1979] QB 705
Facts: By a shipbuilding contract the builders agreed to build a tanker for the owners, for $30,950,000 payable in five instalments. The contract required the builders to open a reverse letter of credit for the repayment of instalments in the event of their default. After the first instalment had been paid, the dollar was devalued and the builders threatened not to deliver unless the remaining instalments were increased by 10 per cent. The owners were advised that there was no legal basis for the claim, but were anxious that they might lose a favourable charter with Shell if the ship were not finished on time, and in a telex dated 28 June 1973, they agreed to the increased payments, ‘to maintain an amicable relationship and without prejudice to our rights.’ The builders did this and delivered the tanker; the owners took delivery without protest. Some eight months later the owners claimed the return of the 10 per cent extra. It was suggested that they did not seek the return of the money sooner because they were concerned about the delivery of a sister ship (The Atlantic Baroness) also being built for them. However, the arbitrators found that this fear was groundless. It was held that although the agreement to pay the extra money might initially have been voidable for economic duress, the fact that the shipping company waited [...]before taking any action, meant they had affirmed it.
Answer
?
Tags
#consideration #contract
Question
North Ocean Shipping Co Ltd v Hyundai Construction Co Ltd and Another (The Atlantic Baron) [1979] QB 705
Facts: By a shipbuilding contract the builders agreed to build a tanker for the owners, for $30,950,000 payable in five instalments. The contract required the builders to open a reverse letter of credit for the repayment of instalments in the event of their default. After the first instalment had been paid, the dollar was devalued and the builders threatened not to deliver unless the remaining instalments were increased by 10 per cent. The owners were advised that there was no legal basis for the claim, but were anxious that they might lose a favourable charter with Shell if the ship were not finished on time, and in a telex dated 28 June 1973, they agreed to the increased payments, ‘to maintain an amicable relationship and without prejudice to our rights.’ The builders did this and delivered the tanker; the owners took delivery without protest. Some eight months later the owners claimed the return of the 10 per cent extra. It was suggested that they did not seek the return of the money sooner because they were concerned about the delivery of a sister ship (The Atlantic Baroness) also being built for them. However, the arbitrators found that this fear was groundless. It was held that although the agreement to pay the extra money might initially have been voidable for economic duress, the fact that the shipping company waited [...]before taking any action, meant they had affirmed it.
Answer
eight months
If you want to change selection, open original toplevel document below and click on "Move attachment"
Parent (intermediate) annotation
Open it ing built for them. However, the arbitrators found that this fear was groundless. It was held that although the agreement to pay the extra money might initially have been voidable for economic duress, the fact that the shipping company waited <span>eight months before taking any action, meant they had affirmed it.<span><body><html>
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.