Mr A bought a motor-cycle on hire-purchase. Mr Attryed had ridden this bicycle for 4,000 miles. Even after he got it back from the makers he had used for five or six weeks and had ridden 3,000 miles on it. He had complained from the beginning of the defects and sent the machine back for them to be remedied. He did not elect to accept it unless they were remedied. But the defects were never satisfactorily remedied. When the rear chain broke, it was the last straw. It showed that the machine could not be relied upon. This knowledge was not brought home to him until this last final incident. The
Held: Affirmation is a matter of election. A man only affirms a contract when he knows of the defects and by his conduct he likes to go on with contract despite them.
If after a breach, the innocent party further performs the contract to a limited extent but at the same time makes it clear that he is reserving his rights to accept the repudiation or is only continuing so as to allow the guilty party to remedy the breach, such further performance does not prejudice his right subsequently to accept the repudiation.
[1970] 1 WLR 1053
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – W E Cox Toner (International) Ltd v Crook EAT 1981
In a case of constructive dismissal, the ordinary contractual rule applies; the wronged party may give the other party an opportunity to remedy the breach. In doing so he does not waive the breach and thereby affirm the contract.
Cited – Buckland v Bournemouth University Higher Education Corporation CA 24-Feb-2010
The claimant had been dismissed from his post as chair of archeology after criticism of his marking practices. Though a report vindicated him, the respondent continued with disciplinary procedures. He claimed unfair dismissal. The EAT had allowed . .
Cited – Buckland v Bournemouth University Higher Education Corporation CA 24-Feb-2010
The claimant had been dismissed from his post as chair of archeology after criticism of his marking practices. Though a report vindicated him, the respondent continued with disciplinary procedures. He claimed unfair dismissal. The EAT had allowed . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 14 August 2021; Ref: scu.401805
