An innocent party cannot ‘obtain the benefit of a later date by pointing to a later default which has occurred before the acceptance of the repudiation’. This is precisely what he is entitled to do at common law for the good reason that that is his choice (and risk). In so far as it is suggested that such an approach is justified where ‘one default is followed inevitably by a number of others’ that is to introduce unnecessary and undesirable factual uncertainties. In so far as it is suggested that such an approach is justified if the first default is the ‘main obligation under the contract’.that too is to introduce uncertainty. In any event the seller’s main obligation under a sale of goods contract is delivery.
Judges:
Staughton J.
Citations:
[1986] 2 Lloyds Rep 654
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Contract
Updated: 21 June 2022; Ref: scu.180030