William Stirling The Younger v Maitland And Boyd: 1864

Cockburn CJ stated: ‘I look on the law to be that, if a party enters into an agreement which can only take effect by the continuance of a certain existing state of circumstances, there is an implied engagement on his part that he shall do nothing of his own motion to put an end to that state of circumstances, under which alone the arrangement can be operative.’

Judges:

Cockburn CJ

Citations:

(1864) 5 B and S 840, [1864] EngR 752, (1864) 122 ER 1043

Links:

Commonlii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedInntrepreneur Pub Company (CPC) and others v Crehan HL 19-Jul-2006
The tenant had taken on pub leases with ties requiring him to buy beer from companies associated with the landlords. The European Commission had issued a decision and the House was asked whether this was binding on the parties.
Held: . .
CitedBournemouth and Boscombe FC Limited v Manchester United FC Limited CA 21-May-1980
Donaldson LJ said: ‘I have on occasion found it a useful test notionally to write into the contract under consideration a declaratory clause expressing the fact that the parties are not subject to the obligations which would flow from the clause . .
CitedShirlaw v Southern Foundries (1926) Ltd HL 1940
Where a party enters into an arrangement which can only take effect by the continuance of an existing state of circumstances, there is an implied engagement on his part that he will do nothing of his own motion to put an end to that state of . .
CitedBournemouth and Boscombe Athletic Football Club Ltd v Lloyds TSB Bank Plc CA 10-Dec-2003
Appeal from refusal of extension of time to serve particulars of claim and strike out. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contract

Updated: 17 May 2022; Ref: scu.243370