References: [1998] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 416, Times 13-Dec-1997
Coram: Clarke J
At common law the buyer’s remedy for failure to perform a contract of sale of goods is to claim damages for non-delivery. Where, as here, there was an available market, the measure of damages is prima facie to be ascertained by the difference between the contract price and the market or current price of the goods at the time or times when they ought to have been delivered.
Arbitration appeal from Gafta. Construction of default clause 28 in Gafta – Form 100.
This case cites:
- Appealed to – Bem Dis a Turk Ticaret S/a Tr -v- International Agritrade Co Ltd CA (Bailii, [1999] EWCA Civ 855)
. . - See Also – In the Matter of Arbitration Acts 1950-1979 and In the Matter of an Arbitration Bem Dis a Turk Ticaret -v- International Agri Trade Co Ltd CA (Bailii, [1999] EWCA Civ 566)
. .
This case is cited by:
- Cited – Fleming & Wendeln Gmbh & Co -v- Sanofi Sa/Ag ComC (Bailii, [2003] EWHC 561 (Comm))
The parties concluded a contract for the sale and purchase of 20,000MT up to 30,000MT at Sellers’ option Russian/Ukrainian black sunseed crop 1997. The price was to ‘be fixed for each shipment latest 15 days prior delivery . . In case . . - Appeal from – Bem Dis a Turk Ticaret S/a Tr -v- International Agritrade Co Ltd CA (Bailii, [1999] EWCA Civ 855)
. . - See Also – In the Matter of Arbitration Acts 1950-1979 and In the Matter of an Arbitration Bem Dis a Turk Ticaret -v- International Agri Trade Co Ltd CA (Bailii, [1999] EWCA Civ 566)
. .