The parties had agreed to export certain goods. The seller failed to deliver, and the only reason given for breaking the contract was the impossibility or illegality of performance attached to it by the Jute (Export) Order 1917. The only reason given by the defendant was the first paragraph of that Order, which dealt only with sale.
Held: Even assuming paragraph 2 to apply, it was not an absolute prohibition, but only a prohibition in the event of failure to get a permit. The defendants never asked the plaintiff to get a permit to deliver, which was something quite different from a permit to manufacture. Lord Reading CJ observed that there was no reason why the law should imply an absolute obligation to do that which the law forbids. It was so said because the Court had construed the contract to mean only that the sellers there were to make their best efforts to obtain the requisite permits.
Viscount Reading CJ
[1917] 2 KB 679
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – John Lewis Properties PLC v Viscount Chelsea ChD 1993
Three Leases of the Peter Jones site to T’s predecessor in 1934 contained covenants by T to redevelop the site in two phases, the second of which related to the MackMurdo and Simon’s Street buildings and was to be completed by December 25 1987. In . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 22 August 2021; Ref: scu.652986