The parties disputed their mutual obligations under aircraft leasing agreements. The insolvent airline said that in signing to accept the condition of the aircraft on delivery, it had not created an estoppel against itself when the aircraft later proved faulty.
Held: The appeal failed, though the result was upheld on different grounds. Aircraft necessarily or accepted and delivered without the full condition being known: ‘the parties know that neither can be absolutely certain of an aircraft’s condition at the point at which the lessee is called upon to accept delivery and the on-going risk. That commercial parties should in such a situation strive to achieve finality in relation to the allocation of risk and responsibility is a commonplace.’ Given the extensive access allowed before acceptance to survey the aircraft, the parties must have intended the condition certificate to be final.
Judges:
Rix, Tomlinson, Kitchin LJJ
Citations:
[2013] EWCA Civ 369
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Westdeutsche Landesbank Girozentrale v Islington London Borough Council HL 22-May-1996
Simple interest only on rate swap damages
The bank had paid money to the local authority under a contract which turned out to be ultra vires and void. The question was whether, in addition to ordering the repayment of the money to the bank on unjust enrichment principles, the court could . .
Appeal from – ACG Acquisition Xx Llc v Olympic Airlines ComC 30-Apr-2012
The parties had contracted for the delivery and lease of a passenger airplane. It was delivered with defects, and the airline went into liquidation. The court was asked whether a claim for damages for defective delivery survives execution by the . .
See Also – Olympic Airlines Sa v ACG Acquisition XX Llc CA 17-Dec-2012
The airline had been placed in liquidation in Greece. The liquidator now appealed against orders for payment of debts and costs to the respondent . .
See Also – ACG Acquisition Xx Llc v Olympic Airlines Sa ComC 21-Apr-2010
The claimant had granted a lease of an aircraft to the defendants, undertaking in the agreement that the aircrat would be airworthy. It now claimed payment under the agreement, the defendant saying it had not been airworthy and had to be withdrawn . .
Cited by:
See Also – Olympic Airlines Sa v ACG Acquisition Xx Llc CA 17-Jun-2014
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Contract, Transport, Insolvency
Updated: 17 November 2022; Ref: scu.472636
