Maredelanto Compania Naviera SA v Bergbau-Handel GmbH
Encyclopedia
Maredelanto Compania Naviera SA v Bergbau-Handel GmbH or The Mihalis Angelos [1970] EWCA Civ 4 is an English contract law
English contract law
English contract law is a body of law regulating contracts in England and Wales. With its roots in the lex mercatoria and the activism of the judiciary during the industrial revolution, it shares a heritage with countries across the Commonwealth , and the United States...

 case, concerning breach of contract.

Facts

The Mihalis Angelos was fixed to sail to Haiphong
Haiphong
, also Haiphong, is the third most populous city in Vietnam. The name means, "coastal defence".-History:Hai Phong was originally founded by Lê Chân, the female general of a Vietnamese revolution against the Chinese led by the Trưng Sisters in the year 43 C.E.The area which is now known as Duong...

 and there load a cargo for delivery in Europe. In the charterparty dated 25 May 1965 the owners stated that the ship was "expected ready to load under this charter about July 1, 1965". The charterparty also provided, in the first sentence of the cancelling clause,


"Should the vessel not be ready to load (whether in berth or not) on or before July 20, 1965, charterers have the option of cancelling this contract, such option to be declared, if demanded, at least 48 hours before vessel's expected arrival at port of loading".


On 17 July 1965 the ship was at Hong Kong
Hong Kong
Hong Kong is one of two Special Administrative Regions of the People's Republic of China , the other being Macau. A city-state situated on China's south coast and enclosed by the Pearl River Delta and South China Sea, it is renowned for its expansive skyline and deep natural harbour...

, still discharging cargo from her previous voyage. It was physically impossible for her to finish discharging and reach Haiphong by 20 July. The charterers gave notice cancelling the charter. The owners treated this as a repudiation and claimed damages, which were the subject of arbitration and of an appeal to Mocatta J. On further appeal, there were three issues. The first was whether the "expected readiness" clause was a condition of which the owners were in breach, entitling the charterers to terminate the charter contract. The second issue was whether (if the answer to the first issue was wrong) the charterers had repudiated the contract by cancelling on 17 July, three days before the specified 20 July deadline. The third issue was as to the damage suffered by the owners, on the assumption that the charterers' premature cancellation had been a repudiation.

Judgment

On the first issue, all three members of the court decided in favour of the charterers, Bergbau, and against the owners, Maredelanto, that 'expected ready' was a condition of the contract. On the second issue, Lord Denning held that the charterers had not repudiated the contract by cancelling on 17 July, but Edmund Davies LJ and Megaw LJ held that they had. On the third issue, Lord Denning, in agreement with the arbitrators, who were themselves agreed, held that they had suffered no damage (p 197): "Seeing that the charterers would, beyond doubt, have cancelled, I am clearly of opinion that the shipowners suffered no loss: and would be entitled at most to nominal damages."

Edmund Davies LJ agreed (p 202): "One must look at the contract as a whole, and if it is clear that the innocent party has lost nothing, he should recover no more than nominal damages for the loss of his right to have the whole contract completed."

Megaw LJ (at pp 209-210) stated:
All members of the court were viewing the case as from the date of acceptance of the repudiation (although only Megaw LJ said so in terms). They were not taking account of later events. They were recognising, as was obvious on the facts as found, that the value of the contractual right which the owners had lost, as of the date of acceptance of the repudiation, was nil because the charter was bound to be lawfully cancelled three days later.

See also

  • Hong Kong Fir Shipping Co Ltd v Kawasaki Kisen Kaisha [1962] 2 QB 26
  • Bunge Corporation v Tradax SA
    Bunge Corporation v Tradax SA
    Bunge Corporation v Tradax Export SA [1981] is an English contract law case, concerning the right to terminate performance of a contract.-Facts:...

    [1981] 2 All ER 513
  • L Schuler AG v Wickman Machine Tool Sales Ltd
    L Schuler AG v Wickman Machine Tool Sales Ltd
    L Schuler AG v Wickman Machine Tool Sales Ltd [1973] is an English contract law case, concerning the right to terminate performance of a contract.-Facts:...

    [1974] AC 235
  • Rice (t/a Garden Guardian) v Great Yarmouth Borough Council (26 July 2000) The Times
  • Golden Strait Corporation v Nippon Yusen Kubishka Kaisha
    Golden Strait Corporation v Nippon Yusen Kubishka Kaisha
    Golden Strait Corporation v Nippon Yusen Kubishka Kaisha [2007] is an English contract law case, concerning the measure of damages for breach of contract.-Facts:...

    [2007] UKHL 12
The source of this article is wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.  The text of this article is licensed under the GFDL.
 
x
OK