The buyers sought to rely on their own failure to pay a deposit to escape from a contract.
Held: They failed. A contract had been entered into by the ‘principals’, though the intention was that upon nomination by them there should be a novation of the contract with the nominee. A provision for payment of the deposit was not a condition precedent to formation of a sale contract but ‘was a fundamental term of a concluded contract’.
Judges:
Robert Goff LJ, Fox LJ, Stephenson LJ
Citations:
[1985] 1 Lloyd’s Reports 93
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Approved – Millichamp v Jones 1982
A contract contained a clause 3 with a provision for the option to be exercisable by notice and in clause 5 the provision that ‘upon exercise of the . . option the intending purchasers shall pay to . . stakeholders by way of deposit . .’ Warner J . .
Cited by:
Cited – Haugland Tankers As v RMK Marine Gemi Yapim Sanayii Ve Deniz Tasimaciligi Isletmesi As ComC 9-Mar-2005
An option agreement was granted for the sale of a ship hull. The option was excercised but the defendant claimed the commitment fee required was not paid.
Held: The exercise of an option had to be in the precise terms set out in the contract. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Contract
Updated: 11 October 2022; Ref: scu.223449
