Book_138_1695639688.pdf

WE DO THE NOTES YOU DO THE LEARNING LLB ANSWERED CORE SUBJECTS CONTRACT, TORT, LAND, PUBLIC, TRUSTS, CRIME & EU CASE NOTES FOR THE UNDERGRADUATE DEGREE IN LAW 1ST EDITION ANSWERED PUBLISHING GOING ON TO THE SQE? OUR BRAND NEW S...

WE DO THE NOTES YOU DO THE LEARNING LLB ANSWERED CORE SUBJECTS CONTRACT, TORT, LAND, PUBLIC, TRUSTS, CRIME & EU CASE NOTES FOR THE UNDERGRADUATE DEGREE IN LAW 1ST EDITION ANSWERED PUBLISHING GOING ON TO THE SQE? OUR BRAND NEW SQE GUIDE IS NOW AVAILABLE! WHETHER YOU WANT SOME EXTRA SUPPORT TO SPEED UP YOUR STUDYING OR ARE PLANNING TO SELF-STUDY, WE'VE GOT YOU COVERED! WWW.LAWANSWERED.COM/SQE TIT LE CASE BOOK CONTRACT LAW TORT CRIMINAL LAW PUBLIC LAW LAND LAW EQUITY & TRUSTS EU LAW Case Notes for the Undergraduate Law Degree BY LAW ANSWERED VER SO FIRST EDITION PUBLISHED IN 2023 BY ANSWERED PUBLISHING SUBJECT TO COPYRIGHT © 2023 ANSWERED LIMITED THE RIGHT OF ANSWERED LIMITED TO BE IDENTIFIED AS THE AUTHOR IS HEREBY ASSERTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE COPYRIGHT, DESIGNS AND PATENTS ACT 1988 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. THIS BOOK IS SOLD SUBJECT TO THE CONDITION THAT IT SHALL NOT BE LENT, RESOLD, OR OTHERWISE CIRCULATED BY ANY MEANS OR IN ANY FORM WITHOUT THE AUTHOR’S EXPRESS PRIOR CONSENT. NO PART OF THIS PUBLICATION MAY BE REPRODUCED, STORED IN A RETRIEVAL SYSTEM, OR TRANSMITTED IN ANY FORM BY ANY MEANS, WHETHER ELECTRONIC OR MECHANICAL, AND WHETHER INVOLVING PHOTOCOPYING, RECORDING OR ANY OTHER METHOD WHATSOEVER WITHOUT SUCH PRIOR CONSENT. DISCLAIMER: THIS BOOK IS INTENDED SOLELY FOR STUDENTS OF THE LAW OF ENGLAND AND WALES, AND IN PARTICULAR FOR THOSE STUDYING THE LAW AT UNDERGRADUATE LEVEL. IT DOES NOT, AND IS NOT INTENDED TO, CONSTITUTE LEGAL ADVICE IN ANY FORM AND DOES NOT CREATE ANY RELATIONSHIP UNDER WHICH LEGAL ADVICE MIGHT BE GIVEN. ALL INFORMATION CONTAINED WITHIN IS CORRECT TO THE BEST OF THE AUTHOR’S KNOWLEDGE AS AT 1 JULY 2023 OR TO THE EXTENT NEWER OR OLDER LAW IS INCLUDED, AND NO GUARANTEES, WARRANTIES, INDEMNITIES OR COMFORT IN RESPECT O F THE FACTUAL ACCURACY OF THE CONTENTS OF THIS BOOK ARE GIVEN OR IMPLIED. STUDENTS SHOULD ALWAYS REFER TO THE INFORMATION PROVIDED BY THEIR LAW SCHOOLS AND TO PRIMARY LEGAL SOURCES IN PREFERENCE TO THIS GUIDE. THIS BOOK SHOULD ONLY BE USED AS AN ADDITIONAL STUDY AID ALONGSIDE STUDENTS’ OWN WORK. ISBN: 978-1-800862‐05‐0 E-ISBN: 978-1-800862‐06‐7 9 781800 862067 TO PURCHASE A COPY PLEASE VISIT WWW.LAWANSWERED.COM  HOW TO USE THIS BOOK This book is a collection of the cases normally considered the most important – it will not be an exhaustive list of every case covered by your course and you will need to know some cases in more detail than our notes. The guide is designed to be a starting point for you. Think of it as a quick reference guide, a crib sheet or a concise set of notes, rather than an exhaustive legal textbook. HOW IT IS LAID OUT All cases are listed alphabetically so you can just search without needing to think about which might be the relevant chapter or section. One small pointer. If you can't immediately find a case with the name you have been taught comes first, try again and look for the second name. Sometimes where cases are appealed numerous times the order of the names can reverse. So for case ABC v XYZ, if you cannot find it - search XYZ v ABC. Throughout the book we have used a star (*) to identify a handful of what are normally considered to be key cases. It does not mean that you should ignore the other cases and your own course providers may well specify additional cases which are very important! HOW WE COVER EACH CASE For each case, we set out the FACTS in brief and summarise an important legal principle, or ratio, that arises from it. We do not go into extensive detail to explain the legal principles; we have tried to keep this book as concise as possible and you will have come across these elsewhere in your studies. Some very important cases are considered in greater depth and with quotations from the judgment to help you understand in the appropriate level of detail. In places we also draw your attention to other cases, with general terms such as COMPARE, DISTINGUISHED and APPLIED. These terms should not be seen as a comprehensive list of which cases refer to others, nor how exactly the cases interact, as courts typically refer to and consider many cases in preparing their reasoned judgments. Cases typically cover many legal and factual issues, the PRINCIPLE column may only focus briefly on one ratio, and not the particular ratio that you are required to know by your law school. Every case can be approached from a number of different angles. In summarising the facts and principles we have also had to omit things and to generalise. 1 HOW TO USE THIS BOOK HOW YOU SHOULD USE THIS CASEBOOK A health warning: we have tried to cover as many cases as possible, as concisely as possible. That means that this book may not cover every single case on your course, nor in the level of detail that you are required to know any one case. In particular, as cases typically cover many legal and factual issues, the PRINCIPLE column may only focus briefly on one ratio, and not the particular ratio that you are required to know by your law school. Every case can be approached from a number of different angles. In summarising the facts and principles we have also had to omit things and to generalise. You should therefore use this book alongside your own study. Think of it as a quick reference guide, a crib sheet or a concise set of notes, rather than an exhaustive legal textbook. Remember that there is never a substitute for actually reading cases yourself, but no law student will be able to read everything, and we hope our guide will help inform you as to which cases are the most worthwhile to read. For a distinction-level set of notes that explains the law beyond the cases, we recommend using this guide alongside our LLB Answered core guides. You can purchase a copy at www.lawanswered.com. We hope you find this book to be helpful and accurate. If you have any comments about how its usefulness or accuracy might be improved, or otherwise want to work with us, please get in touch with us at [email protected]. 2 CONTRACT LAW CONTRACT LAW C ASES CASE FACTS PRINCIPLE A A ship owner committed an “efficient AB Corporation v The charterers were only entitled to breach”, of a charter to enable itself to CD Company damages in respect of the losses they charter the vessel out to a third party incurred and not to a share of the profits (“The Sine more profitably. The charterer claimed earned by the owner as result of the A Nomine”) damages for the breach of the charter breach. It was not the role of the courts and for the additional profits made by the to make moral judgments. owner as a result of the breach. B The interpretation of ambiguous Where genuinely ambiguous provisions C Ace Paper v Fry provisions in a contract relating to debt exist, business common sense should be repayment was considered in the context used as a method of interpretation. D of “business common sense”. COMPARE with Arnold v Britton E Established the “postal rule”: acceptance Acceptance of an offer to buy wool was by post occurs at the moment of posting, F posted by the offeree (the party to whom not at the moment of receipt. the offer had been made) but was G Adams v Lindsell* delayed in reaching the offeror (the party COMPARE with Byrne v Van Tienhoven, who had made the offer). In the interim, Henthorn v Fraser, Holwell Securities v H the offeror had assumed the buyer was Hughes, Household Fire v Grant, not interested and had sold the goods to Getreide-Import Gesellschaft v Contimar I someone else. and Re London and Northern Bank ex parte Jones J Established the test for specific K Adderley v Dixon* The claimant sought specific performance performance: damages must be of an agreement to transfer debts. inadequate for specific performance to L be granted. M Although the employee could claim for breach of (employment) contract, he Addis v could not claim damages for injured N Gramophone An employee was wrongfully dismissed feelings or reputational harm under Company by his employer. contract law. O COMPARE with Jarvis v Swan Tours and P Hayes v Dodd Q The Court of Appeal accepted that the Ahuja The claimant brought an action alleging representations were false but found that R Investments ltd v the claimant had not relied on them, and fraudulent misrepresentation. There was Victorygame a claim for contractual interest which was that even had there been any reliance no S loss would have been incurred. The set at 12% in the event of default. default interest rate was held to be an T unenforceable penalty. U Where liability is limited but not Due to negligence and a breach of excluded, the clause should generally be Ailsa Craig v contract by the defendant’s security V given its ordinary meaning (i.e. it is to be Malvern Shipping company, a ship belonging to the construed less harshly than an exemption W claimant sank. The contract contained a clause). clause limiting, but not excluding, liability. COMPARE with Arnold v Britton X Y 3 Z CONTRACT LAW CASE FACTS PRINCIPLE The claimants were estopped from Alan (WJ) & Co v A contract for the supply of coffee beans claiming that payment should be made in El Nasr Export and expressed payment to be due in Kenyan Kenyan shillings. Reliance for the purpose Import Co Shillings. A letter of credit was opened in of promissory estoppel does not need to Sterling and payments were accepted in be detrimental. A Sterling. COMPARE with The Post Chaser B Ownership of the cargo had passed to the C endorsee third party. Although the The claimant chartered a ship, which was claimant had privity with the defendant, D owned by the defendant. Carriage of oil the claimant could not recover was covered by a bill of lading naming the Albacruz v substantial damages without ownership E claimant as consignee and the goods as of the cargo. Owners of the deliverable to their order. In the course of Albazero* the voyage the ship and her cargo Where two parties contract with each F became a total loss due to breaches of other in the knowledge that they will (“The Albazero”) the charter. Prior to the loss, the claimant G transfer the goods subject to the contract had endorsed the bill of lading to a third to a third party, the contract will be party, although it arrived the day after H deemed to be for that third party’s the loss. The claimants brought an action benefit. I to recover losses. COMPARE with McAlpine v Panatown and St Martin’s v McAlpine J Alderslade v The defendant lost linen sent to be K The only way in which the goods could Hendon Laundry cleaned by the plaintiff; the defendant have been lost was by negligence and the L sought to rely on a limitation of liability clause was effective to limit liability. clause. M Alec Lobb v Total Lobb had a finance deal with Total where Oil he was locked into purchasing oil from A freely negotiated hard bargain will not N Total for 21 years. He tried to claim the amount to duress. agreement had been made under duress. O The court did not provide a fixed P Miss Allcard joined a religious order and definition of undue influence; allowing it passed on property to a member of the Allcard v Skinner to remain flexible for the future. The Q order. After leaving the order, she court held that there had been undue attempted to claim back her money, saying she had been unduly influenced. influence, but the claim failed under the R doctrine of laches (i.e. delay). S Alpenstow v Contracts were professionally drafted The court found there was an intention by Regalian and included the words “subject to the parties to be legally bound. This was T Properties PLC contract” pending the finalisation of demonstrated by the professional some terms and details. drafting. U The claimants bought a warehouse for The court held that the claimants had V Amalgamated Investment v John redevelopment having checked with the accepted the risk of future listing; there defendants that it was not listed. It was no frustration, and no mistake. W Walker* became a listed building two days after Mistake must occur at the time of the contract was executed. contracting. X Y 4 Z CONTRACT LAW CASE FACTS PRINCIPLE American The claimants alleged the defendants Set out the requirements for an interim Cyanamid v were infringing their intellectual property prohibitory injunction: (i) a serious Ethicon* rights. They sought an interim prohibitory question to be tried; (ii) consideration of injunction to prevent any further the balance of convenience; and (iii) infringement. maintenance of the status quo ante. A A quantum meruit payment was ordered. B The relevant considerations were: AMP Advisory & 1) Had the defendant been enriched? C Management The claimant alleged that he was entitled Partners v Force 2) Was the enrichment at the claimant’s D to receive payment for services for India Formula One expense? brokering a deal. 3) Was the enrichment unjust? E Were any defences available to the defendant? F In deciding whether the parties had G Anchor 2010 v intention to create legal relations the Midas The dispute related to the final accounts court will examine whether all essential H Construction following the design and construction of terms had been agreed. Performance by a retirement community. a contractor on a contract requiring I detailed documentation was persuasive in favour of a binding contract. J 1) A claimant can choose damages either K At the last moment, Reed cancelled a on the basis of the contract having been Anglia TV v Reed* contract to appear in a play on Anglia TV. performed or in respect of reliance L Anglia were unable to find a replacement interest. and had spent money preparing the show 2) The claimant can claim for pre- M which did not go ahead. contractual expenses of an abortive transaction. N The claimants sought an order for search O Established the test for a search order: (i) Anton Piller v against the defendants on the grounds an extremely strong prima facie case; (ii) P Manufacturing that they had been divulging confidential serious actual or potential damage to the Processes* information about the claimant’s claimant; and (iii) evidence that the products to competitors. This is a defendant has the items and may destroy Q draconian order and granted only in or hide them. limited circumstances. R A contract for the installation of S machinery in a warehouse had almost All future obligations are discharged, so Appleby v Myers been completed when the warehouse no payment could be recovered, even T burned down due to an accidental fire. though performance was almost The contract was to be paid upon complete. U completion. The warehouse no longer existed; the contract was frustrated. V The claimant must “come to equity with W Argyll v Argyll The Duchess of Argyll sought to prevent clean hands”, i.e. they must have her ex-husband from publishing her diary. properly carried out their own X obligations. Y 5 Z CONTRACT LAW CASE FACTS PRINCIPLE It is usually appropriate to use the natural A dispute over service charge payable meaning of words in a contract, even Arnold v Britton* under a contract for leased holiday where it makes the results onerous / chalets in a leisure park. It was unclear expensive for a party. whether the annual percentage increase A was cumulative. COMPARE with Ace Paper v Fry and Ailsa Craig v Malvern B The guarantee was subject to a condition C The claimant bank bought some precedent that the machinery existed; machinery and leased it to B. The since the machines did not exist the claim D Associated defendant bank guaranteed B's failed. Per curiam: "A contract will be void Japanese Bank v obligations. B had perpetrated a fraud on ab initio for common mistake if a mistake Credit du Nord both banks. The machinery did not exist. by both parties renders the subject matter E B went bankrupt and the claimant looked of the contract essentially and radically to the defendant guarantor to fulfil B's different from that which the parties F obligations. believed." G 1) Example of where the wronged party had no “realistic practical alternative”. H An agreement to deliver cartons at £1.10 per carton was made on the estimate of Here, the wronged party was reliant on the contract and was not in a position to I 400-600 cartons being delivered. When the first load was for just 200, the find anyone else to do the deliveries in time. J Atlas Express v defendant refused to deliver any more Kafco* unless a minimum price of £440 a load 2) Example of illegitimate pressure – was set. K threatening to breach a contract is (While this is often cited as a duress case illegitimate in the eyes of the court. L the court also noted that there was no 3) Accepting the changed contract under consideration for the change in contract duress will not be affirmation if you M terms.) protest at the time and sue immediately afterwards. N Attorney General Reid was the Director of Public O for Hong Kong v Prosecutions in Hong Kong and took The defendant can be made to account Reid bribes which influenced how (and for any profits made from bribes. P whether) he pursued prosecutions of some criminals. Q Blake had been a double agent and had R George Blake published his memoirs, No Attorney General spied against the UK. This was an Other Choice, despite having undertaken v Blake not to divulge information about his time exceptional case where the public S interest demanded he should not profit. in the intelligence services. The Crown attempted to recover his royalties. Established the test for the (rarely- T awarded) restitution interest. U Attorney General The court set out circumstances in which An injunction was granted (but later v Guardian lifted) to prevent the publication of a injunctions will be granted to protect V confidences. An order to account for spy's memoirs. profits is possible. W X Y 6 Z CONTRACT LAW CASE FACTS PRINCIPLE Statements about the profitability of a mine were made during its sale. The buyer did not believe the claims and sent Where a claimant relies on his own Attwood v Small an agent to investigate. The buyer relied investigation, he is unable to claim to on the agent’s report and bought the have been induced to enter the contract A mine, only to later find that it was not as by a misrepresentation of the seller. valuable as the agent or the seller had B made out. C A carrier faced with an anticipatory breach from their supplier elected to D Avery v Bowden affirm the contract. A frustrating event A frustrating event, following affirmation, (the breakout of the Crimean war) can prevent any claim in damages. E happened after the affirmation, which discharged all future obligations under the contract. F Avon Insurance v To be actionable, a representation must G Presentations which had been made Swire Fraser* be “substantially false”. The test is very about insurance cover contained alleged H strict because a misrepresentation under misrepresentations. contract falls into the fraud category. I Avraamides paid a company to refurbish their building. The company sold their For the purpose of s. 1(3) C(RTP)A 1999, J Avraamides v business to Colwill. A clause in the the name or class or description of the Colwill contract stated that Colwill would take on obligation must be expressly identified, K that company's “current liabilities” or the clause cannot be relied on, as was without defining the term. The the case here. L refurbishment was unsatisfactory, Avraamides sued Colwill. M AXA Sun Life An agreement between an insurance Services plc v N company and its advisers contained Campbell Martin An exclusion of liability clause will only be terms excluding the insurance company Ltd and Others upheld if it is clearly stated. O from liability for misrepresentation by its agents (the advisers). P Aylesbury Aylesbury claimed that this was inducing Football Club v Q a breach of contract with them and Watford Watford football club purported to enter claimed compensation. The court held Association into a contract with a minor for the that the minor could not be bound by the R Football Club provision of training and experience. contract. It was not in his interest as it contained onerous restrictive covenants. S 1) Example of where the wronged party T B had no “realistic practical alternative”. B&S Contracts Workmen were to build display stalls for They had no chance of finding other U and Design v an exhibition. They were working out workers at that point, and many of the Victor Green their notice period and had accepted a stalls had already been let. V Publications severance package. The workmen 2) Example of illegitimate pressure; there refused to continue unless they were paid was a threatened breach of contract. W half the severance up-front. COMPARE with CTN v Gallagher and X DSND Subsea v Petroleum Geo Services Y 7 Z CONTRACT LAW CASE FACTS PRINCIPLE Balfour Beatty A contract for the provision of power to a A supplier of a commodity cannot be Construction building site was breached, meaning presumed to know the technical details of (Scotland) v work on a concrete structure being built the way in which the commodity will be Scottish Power plc through a “continuous pour” method had used. to restart from scratch. A APPLIED Hadley B There is a rebuttable presumption that An agreement between husband and wife there is no intention to create legal C Balfour v Balfour regarding payments to be made to the relations in domestic arrangements. wife while the husband was abroad was There was no contract. D [1918-19] breached. The wife attempted to enforce it as a legally binding contract. COMPARE with Bunn and Bunn v Rees and Parker E F This case concerned a battle of the forms as to whose standard terms and G Balmoral Group v conditions applied and allegations that A specific purpose made known to the the goods supplied were not suitable for seller will apply even if the item is fit for Borealis H the specific purpose for which they were its general purpose (under s. 14(3) SGA required. The claimants failed to prove 1979, now s. 10 CRA 2015) the goods were not fit for the specific I purpose. J Waterlow were printers of bank notes for Mitigation will not be “weighed in nice K Banco de Portugal central banks. A forger had drawn up and scales at the instance of the [breaching] v Waterlow and had notarised a fake contract and letters party”. The mitigating party is only L Sons* with the bank, on the basis of which required to act reasonably and will not Waterlow began printing notes. lose out because the breaching party, M Following discovery of this, the bank sued who put them in the difficult position, Waterlow. could suggest a better way to mitigate. N A ship, which had been chartered for The requisition was deemed to have O twelve months, was requisitioned during frustrated the contract. The ship was first Bank Line v Arthur the First World War and was unavailable available five months after the charter P Capel to the charterers. When the ship was should have begun. returned the owners sold it. The COMPARE with FA Tamplin v Anglo- Q charterers claimed it should have been Mexican and National Carriers v put at their disposal. Panalpina R The intention of the parties as to whether S a statement is a term, or a representation When asked, the seller assured the buyer can depend on the importance placed T Bannerman v White that hops being supplied had not been upon the statement by the other party. treated with sulphur. In fact, they had Here the purchaser would not have U been. bought if he had known about the sulphur. It was a term of the agreement V that sulphur should not have been used. W X Y 8 Z CONTRACT LAW CASE FACTS PRINCIPLE Barclays contracted with Fairclough for the cleaning of two of its warehouses’ 1) The sub-sub-contractors were liable in roofs. Fairclough sub-contracted the negligence, but the main contractor had work to Carne, who sub-sub-contracted failed to oversee their work and was also Barclays Bank v Fairclough it. While cleaning the sub-sub-contractor negligent in failing to inform itself of the A created asbestos slurry which caused risks of dealing with asbestos. Barclays economic loss. The Court 2) Skilled contractors owe those they B considered whether the sub-sub- work for a duty of care – as do contractor owed Carne a duty of care in professional advisors. C respect of economic loss. D A woman signed a second charge over the When the wife executed the charge, the matrimonial home at her husband's bank had an obligation to warn her of the E Barclays Bank v O'Brien request and without reading it. She risk to the matrimonial home or to claimed that she had not understood that recommend legal advice. It had done F it covered all her husband's potential neither and the legal charge had to be set debts and that it was not time limited. aside. G An auctioneer withdrew goods from the H Barry v Davies Where there is no reserve, the highest bid (t/a Heathcote auction after Barry had legitimately bid; at an auction creates a unilateral contract the auctioneer thought the price was not I Ball & Co) between the auctioneer and the bidder. high enough. There had been no reserve on the items. COMPARE with Payne v Cave J K The Supreme Court found there was no express term awarding an entitlement to payment to Barton. L Foxpace was selling a property and entered into an oral agreement with A term could only be implied as a matter M Barton (who was not a property agent) to of fact if it were necessary to give effect Barton & others v pay Barton £1.2m if Barton introduced a to the parties unexpressed intention, or N Morris & purchaser who then bought the property by law if statute or common law imply another* for £6.5m. Barton introduced a purchaser such terms into a contract like this. O who paid £6m for the property and the A term will only be implied in fact if Supreme Court had to determine necessary and if this was intended from P whether any payment was due to Barton. the outset. There was no such evidence here. This was intended to be a high risk, Q high reward contract, the effect of which would be negated if reasonable R remuneration were to be paid. S B and other directors of a company wanted to remove A who was the T Barton v managing director. During negotiations Physical duress need only be one of the Armstrong on a buyout, A threatened B’s life. B made reasons causing the behaviour of the U a generous settlement to A, partly individual alleging that duress – a lower because of the duress and personal bar than economic duress. V threat, but also believing this to be in the best interest of the company. W X Y 9 Z CONTRACT LAW CASE FACTS PRINCIPLE In a scenario similar to Etridge, a husband The husband barged into the room where BCCI v Aboody sought a mortgage to pay off his business the wife was receiving independent legal debts (which would benefit both the advice. This was an example of actual husband and wife). undue influence. A The implied condition that goods will A car described as a 1961 model had been correspond with their description (now B Beale v Taylor rebuilt from an older model. The buyer the CRA 2015) will apply even if the goods had inspected the car before purchasing have been inspected prior to purchase. C it. COMPARE with Priest v Last D Beattie v Ebury A statement as to future intention cannot E Alleged misrepresentations made by be true or false at the moment it is made, company directors. so will generally not be actionable: F intentions can change. G The claimant sought specific performance Where an item is of special value to the Behnke v Bede* of a contract. He had contracted to buy a claimant, but is otherwise unexceptional, H ship that was unique in complying with it may be the subject of a specifically- specific regulations. enforceable contract. I An agreement to make redundancy J payments to terminate the employment of company directors was reached. It “Does the state of the new facts destroy K subsequently came to light that the the identity of the subject-matter as it Bell v Lever Bros.* directors had acted in a way that would was in the original state of the facts?” If L have enabled Lever Bros. to terminate so, the contract can be void for mistake. their employment without recompense. If it is only the quality of the agreement M Lever Bros. attempted to rely on the that is affected, the contract will not be mistake to void the agreement but failed; void for mistake. the contract was held to be not entirely N different from the original facts. O A businessman entered into an Beswick v Beswick agreement to pass on his business on the The widow was entitled to benefit from P the contract even though she had not basis of a weekly payment to be made to him and then to his widow after his death. been party to it. Q R An opera singer contracted for three months missed six days of rehearsals due to illness. He was replaced with a new S singer. The contract had stated that the A warranty is a less important term of the singer had to be in London “without fail” T Bettini v Gye contract which does not “go to the root” six days before 30th March. He arrived on of the contract 28th March. This failure was held to be U breach of a warranty, missing rehearsals COMPARE with Poussard v Spiers did not “go to the root of the contract”. V The employer could not terminate the contract. W X Y 10 Z CONTRACT LAW CASE FACTS PRINCIPLE Cost of cure is the usual remedy for Birse Construction A building was constructed and a number construction contracts, but not where it is v Eastern of defects remained. The buyers intended out of proportion, or where there is no Telegraph Co* to sell it on without remedying those intention to remedy the defects and no defects but claimed the cost of rectifying A loss arising from the defects in respect of them. reduced sale proceeds. B Two fields were to be sold. The purchaser Both parties had the same knowledge wished to graze sheep although both (that the farmland had never grazed C parties knew the land had never been sheep). Where the seller has comparable Bisset v Wilkinson D used for that purpose. The seller opined knowledge to the buyer, an opinion will that, with work, the farmland would be not be elevated to a statement of fact and suitable for 2,000 sheep. He was not an so will not be actionable. E expert; his estimate was an opinion. COMPARE with Esso v Mardon F A response to an invitation to tender for An invitation to tender can be binding G Blackpool and pleasure flights from Blackpool airport when specific language is used. In this Fylde Aero Club v case, the Council were bound to consider Blackpool BC was not considered by the Council, even the Aero Club’s tender. H though they had specified that all tenders would be considered. COMPARE with Spencer v Harding I The conversation had taken place but J During the course of a drunken evening there was no consideration from the the claimant (who worked as a consultant Blue v Ashley to Sports Direct) alleged that he was claimant and it was difficult to see what K actions he could personally have taken to offered a bonus of £15 million if the shares of Sports Direct reached a value of encourage the climb in the share price. L The offer had not created a unilateral £8 each. contract. M A trust owned a substantial percentage of The defendant can be made to account N a company. The company enquired for any profits made in breach of fiduciary whether the trust would like to sell back duty, whether innocent or not. In this O their shares, as a result of which the case, the trustees were obliged to Boardman v trustees received inside information account for all the profit they had made P Phipps* about the company. The trustees then on the shares and pay it back to the trust, bought the rest of the shares of the Q as they had made the profit as a result of company independently (not in their information they received in their capacity as trustees), and restructured R position as trustees. There was no the company, improving the return on suggestion that they had behaved both their own shares and the trust's shares. improperly. S T Work to install central heating in Mr Mahadeva’s house was completed, but Substantial performance is not achieved U Bolton v poorly. He refused to pay. The court held where the work done is not suitable for Mahadeva that the work did not equate to the primary contractual purpose. In these substantial performance as it was not circumstances the court may decline to V effective for the purpose of the contract, order any payment. so no payment was required. W X Y 11 Z CONTRACT LAW CASE FACTS PRINCIPLE Boulton was the new owner of a shop. Acceptance can only be made by the Jones, a regular customer, had sent a offeree. Per Pollock CB: Boulton v Jones written order to the previous shop owner. Boulton sent the goods to Jones, who “If you propose to make a contract with A refused to pay for them on the grounds then B cannot substitute himself without A that his offer was not made to Boulton. your consent.” B Hunt had rights to oil exploration and entered into an agreement with BP that C BP was entitled to recover a just sum. BP Exploration v they would conduct the exploration for an eventual profit share. A large oil However, where the possible valuable D Hunt benefit has been reduced to zero value, reserve was found but was requisitioned by the Libyan government. BP claimed for no claim is available under s. 1(3) of that E Act. expenses incurred under s. 1(3) Law Reform (Frustrated Contracts) Act 1943. F Bridgehouse v One party to a contract for the sale of G BAE Systems The striking off caused the termination of properties was struck off the register of companies. the contract. H I A contractual obligation may be The owner of a block of flats offered discharged or varied by equitable waiver J tenants long leases, promising that it where there is an agreement between would meet later roofing repair costs. The the parties. Brikom K original tenants and assignees Investments v The benefit of estoppel can pass to successfully recovered the repair costs Carr from that original owner. The assignees successors in title. L also successfully recovered either by Where the promisee has conducted reason of estoppel, or because there was M himself as intended by the promisor, the a collateral contract regarding the burden will be on the promisor to repairs. establish that the promisee’s conduct N was not induced by the promise. O Brinkibon, based in London, bought steel As a general rule, contracts are formed in P Brinkibon Ltd v from Stahag, based in Vienna. Brinkibon the place where the instantaneous Stahag Stahl accepted Stahag’s offer by telex. When a communication is received. Q dispute later arose, the place where the contract had been formed was at issue. CONFIRMED Entores v Miles R A crane hired from the claimants sank Where it is normal trade custom, a term S into a marsh. A term that the risk can be implied into a contract where British Crane Hire remained with the hirer had not been there is a sufficiently regular and T v Ipswich Plant expressly incorporated into contract but consistent course of dealing. was held to be incorporated impliedly. U Both companies were in the plant hire COMPARE with Henry Kendall v William industry and this was a common term in Lillico, Hollier v Rambler and Petrotrade v Texaco V the industry. W X Y 12 Z CONTRACT LAW CASE FACTS PRINCIPLE The lease of a number of carriages British Waggon v included repair obligations. When the Performance of an obligation by a third Lea original repair contractor went into party is acceptable where it is capable of liquidation British Waggon took on the being performed by that third party. A contract. Lea was not able to avoid payment under the lease. B British Westinghouse v C A purchase of deficient turbines was Whilst there is no strict absolute duty to Underground mitigated by purchasing more efficient mitigate, “reasonable steps” should be Electric ones which provided a substantial saving. taken by the wronged party. D E Brogden had supplied the Railway with There was no formal acceptance of the F Brogden v coal for some time. The Railway then Metropolitan contract but the parties acted in drew up a contract to continue their accordance with it for a time before a G Railway relationship, but left some parts blank, dispute arose Acceptance by conduct is Brogden filled them in and returned the possible. H contract. Metropolitan filed it unsigned. I The court may restrict equitable Bulmer v remedies where the claimant has J Bollinger* A dispute over the use of the word suggested he will not enforce his legal “champagne” on bottles of Babycham. rights and the defendant has acted to his K detriment as a result. L Heads of agreement which preceded a There is a rebuttable presumption that an Bunn and Bunn v M detailed contract between the parties intention to create legal relations does Rees and Parker were sufficient to show intention to exist in commercial dealings. create legal relations. N COMPARE with Balfour v Balfour O The defendants made an offer to the Where an acceptance has been posted, claimants by post, the claimants accepted the offeror cannot revoke their offer, P Byrne v Van by telegram on the day they received the even if they have not yet received the Tienhoven offer, 11th October. The offer had been acceptance. The postal rule applies. Q withdrawn by the defendants by a letter dated 8th October which arrived on 20th COMPARE with Henthorn v Fraser and Getreide-Import Gesellschaft v Contimar R October. A contract was held to exist. S C Middleton had a licence for C&P’s The claimant must show that he would C&P Haulage v property, which he improved despite a have been able to recoup the money he T Middleton clause saying he had to leave any had spent if the contract had been improvements when he left. He was properly performed. This was not the U evicted prior to the end of the licence and case here. claimed damages. V W X Y 13 Z CONTRACT LAW CASE FACTS PRINCIPLE Established the “Canada Steamship test” An employee of Canada Steamship for excluding liability for negligence burned down a warehouse and damaged through a contract. a substantial amount of property through his negligence. The lease had purported 1) Courts will look to see if the clause A Canada Steamship expressly refers to negligence; to exclude liability for negligence. The Lines v R* Privy Council held that the purported 2) The court will consider whether the B exclusion was unsuccessful. In this clause is wide enough to cover negligence judgment the court suggested that a strict by employees; C approach to interpretation should be taken against the person seeking to rely 3) Could the claim be framed other than D on the exclusion clause. in negligence? COMPARE with Persimmon Homes E The court was asked to consider whether F Canary Wharf v the UK's withdrawal from the EU would be a frustrating event in relation to a Brexit would not frustrate the lease even G European where the lessor had moved its Medicines Agency lease. The judge reviewed the law and suggested that for frustration an headquarters away from the UK to H remain within the EU area. elemental common purpose had to have been frustrated. I Felix were late providing cladding for a Example of where the wronged party had J Carillion large contract. Felix said they would only no “realistic practical alternative”. Construction Ltd v make future deliveries if a higher final Carillion, who had subcontracted the K Felix Ltd sum were paid. Carillion had a liability for work to Felix, had no other alternative; a substantial penalty payments for any court action to remedy the breach would L delay in project completion. take too long. M An advert for a medical device promised An advert can be a unilateral offer when N to prevent influenza and offered to pay it prescribes an act which can be accepted Carlill v Carbolic £100 cash to anyone who used the device simply by performance of the specified O Smoke Ball Co* in the prescribed manner, yet contracted act. [1891-4] influenza. The company placed funds with a bank to show its sincerity to pay. COMPARE with Fisher v Bell, Grainger v P Carlill fell ill and sued. Gough and Partridge v Crittenden Q Stressline had set up a plant and bought R materials to compete with Catnic in the An interim prohibitory injunction would Catnic manufacturing of steel lintels. Catnic have resulted in a disproportionately Components v S were a large company with a large large loss on the investment that Stressline turnover that was unlikely to be much Stressline had made, and would have a affected by the competitor. They sought negligible effect on Catnic, so was T an Interim prohibitory injunction to discharged on appeal. prevent Stressline’s operation. U V W X Y 14 Z CONTRACT LAW CASE FACTS PRINCIPLE Two conjoined cases heard by the Established the new test for construction Supreme Court. Both related to of liquidated damages / penalty clauses: contractual penalty clauses 1) “A clause providing for the 1) In Cavendish, the contract for sale of a consequences of a breach of contract is Middle Eastern marketing company A unenforceable if it imposes on the Cavendish Square contained restrictive covenants. In the contract breaker consequences which are Holding BV v Talal event of breach El Makdessi was no B out of all proportion to any legitimate El Makdessi* longer entitled to the final two interests of the innocent party in its instalments of payment for the company, enforcement.” Legitimate interests are C ParkingEye Ltd v and there was a put option to purchase widely defined. Beavis* D his remaining shares. A large amount of the purchase price had represented 2) Even if something is not a genuine pre- goodwill. estimate of loss, but is still commercially E justifiable, it will be upheld, as long as it 2) In ParkingEye, Mr Beavis overstayed in falls short of being extravagant, a car park by an hour and was charged F exorbitant or unconscionable. £85. It was held that this was not a penalty. OVERRULED Dunlop v New Garage G A shipment of animal feed arrived in poor H Cehave v Bremer* condition and worth around 60% of its The feed was clearly fit for purpose and (“The Hansa expected value. The buyers purported to the proper course here was damages for I repudiate the contract. They the diminution in its value. The Nord”) subsequently bought the feed for less purchasers were not entitled to J than half the original price from a third repudiate. party. K During the Second World War the leaseholder struggled to fill his flats. The 1) Established the doctrine of promissory L Central London Property Trust v landlord of the block of flats agreed to estoppel, with its 5 elements. accept a lower ground rent “for the M High Trees House* 2) The leaseholder could not go back on duration of the war”. In 1945, with all the the agreement even though the change flats full, the landlord sought to resurrect was not supported by consideration. N the original agreement. O Neither party could recover money from Chandler v C hired a room to watch the coronation P the other (not the return of the deposit or Webster procession and paid £100 of the £141 the balance of the hire fee). When a rental due. The procession did not take place because the king fell ill. contract is frustrated, the loss is borne Q where it falls. R Beach deckchairs were for hire and a Notice of exemption clauses must be Chapelton v Barry notice requested that users should given on a document that has contractual S UDC purchase a ticket. The claimant did effect, before or at the time of purchase the ticket but was injured by the contracting. Here the sign constituted an T chair. The ticket included an exemption offer, which was accepted when the clause on the reverse. ticket was purchased. U The Claimant was an actress who entered a beauty contest, in which the top 12 V Chaplin v Hicks The claimant was entitled to recover contestants were to get a job. She got through to the last 50 contestants but did damages for her loss of chance of gaining W employment. not receive the invitation to interview until it was too late to attend. X Y 15 Z CONTRACT LAW CASE FACTS PRINCIPLE Consideration must be sufficient but For reasons relating to copyright law the need not be adequate: “A peppercorn courts had to decide whether chocolate does not cease to be good consideration if Chappell & Co v wrappers sent to Nestle together with a it is established that the promisee does Nestle Co Ltd fee (as part of a promotion under which not like pepper and will throw away the A customers received a record) amounted corn.” to part consideration. Nestle threw away The wrappers were held to be part of the B the wrappers on receipt. consideration – their value to Nestle was in the form of increased chocolate sales. C This case involved a contract for some When the deadline was not met, the D Charles Rickards bodywork to be undertaken on car. The customer was able to repudiate the Ltd v Oppenheim customer was informed that the work contract. The court held that time could E would not be completed in time and gave be made the essence of the contract on the contractor another four weeks to the giving of reasonable notice to the F complete the contract. other party. G A property developer sent a letter of instruction to the Bank to set up an account to receive investor funds in The Court of Appeal allowed the recovery H and reviewed the requirements for the Chudley v respect of a development. The account Clysesdale Bank was never opened, and the developer operation of the Act. Investors did not I have to be aware of the letter of fraudulently misapplied the money. The case concerned the right of an investor to instruction to the bank in order to be able J to recover. Reference to payments into make a recovery against the Bank for its negligence under the provisions of the the Client Account sufficiently identified K those eligible to recover. Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999. L 1) Where actual undue influence is M established (as it was here), there is no Mr Pitt pressured his wife into signing up need to show that it caused “manifest N to a mortgage. The spouses told the bank disadvantage”. that it was for a holiday home. In reality, CICB Mortgages v Mr Pitt used the money to play the stock 2) Where the loan is ostensibly for the O Pitt joint benefit of husband and wife, the market. When the market crashed and the bank attempted to call in the bank is not put on notice of the undue P mortgage, the wife pleaded undue influence. The husband had unduly influence. influenced the wife, but the bank had no Q notice of it; the bank’s right to repayment was unaffected. R A collateral contract existed. It was for a S City of lease of a room during the war; it The parol evidence rule, which prevents a Westminster v conflicted with the main lease. The party adducing extrinsic evidence to T Mudd* council attempted to evict the room clarify the terms of a contract (see Jacobs occupant, who argued that collateral v Batavia), can be avoided for collateral U contracts were admissible even in the contracts. face of the parol evidence rule. V The claimant was induced by Clarke v Dickson misrepresentations to buy shares. The W Impossibility will bar rescission. company went into liquidation and was wound up. X Y 16 Z CONTRACT LAW CASE FACTS PRINCIPLE Clea Shipping Charterers told owners that they had no Corp v Bulk Oil Where affirmation of a contract is “wholly further use for a ship. The owners refused unreasonable”, it will not be allowed. (“The Alaskan to accept repudiation and kept the ship Here the owners should have accepted Trader”) ready and fully crewed until the end of repudiation and claimed damages. A the charterparty