There were two contracts for the sale of ships. The question was whether, when one ship was requisitioned by the Government, the purchasers were obliged to accept and pay for the other. Their case was that they were not obliged to do so, as the vendors were not able to perform their side of the bargain.
Held: The evidence showed that the object of the two contracts was to give effect to an agreement for the sale of the two ships together. The purchasers were entitled to refuse to accept delivery of one ship without the other. It is always open to inquiry whether the existence of two separate documents represented the real bargain between the parties.
Judges:
Viscount Findlay
Citations:
1919 SC (HL) 132
Jurisdiction:
Scotland
Cited by:
Cited – Inveresk Plc v Tullis Russell Papermakers Ltd SC 5-May-2010
The parties had undertaken the sale of a business (from I to TR) with part of the consideration to be payable on later calculation of the turnover. The agreement provided for an audit if the parties failed to agree. TR issued a figure. I argued that . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Contract
Updated: 19 November 2022; Ref: scu.410706