Dimskal Shipping Co. S.A. v International Transport Workers Federation [1991] 3 W.L.R. 875
Trade Dispute – Interference with contractual rights – Inducement by Defendants
Facts:
The Plaintiffs owned a vessel manned by Greeks and Filipinos when it docked at a Swedish port. An agent of I.T.F informed the plaintiff that unless their workers enter into employment contracts with their crew and the I.T.F, the vessel would be blacked. The agent demanded the employees be paid in accordance with the I.T.F pay scale and that payments be backdated. The agreements also stipulated that the association with I.T.F was completely voluntary on the part of the plaintiff. The plaintiff orally agreed but failed to comply with the demands resulting in the vessel being blackened, so they signed. The Plaintiffs then brought action for duress, seeking damages for the torts of intimidation and interference with contractual rights. The I.T.F’s actions were lawful under Swedish law so they sought damages for a breach of contract.
Issues:
Whether duress was the reason that the Plaintiffs had breached their contractual duties and whether there was duress under English law.
Held:
The appeal by I.T.F was dismissed. The law governing the contract was found to be English law and Swedish law. Dimskal’s default in payment could be due to the duress that I.T.F put them under, as there was nothing in English law that said that the blacking of a ship did not amount to duress. Thus, although the laws of the country apply to all persons as far as criminal activity is concerned, it does not apply to contract law where a party is entitled to rely on the law of their own country, unless otherwise specified.
Updated 19 March 2026
This case summary accurately reflects the decision in Dimskal Shipping Co SA v International Transport Workers Federation [1992] 2 AC 152 (the House of Lords decision, which is the authoritative report; the article cites the Court of Appeal reference [1991] 3 WLR 875). The House of Lords upheld the conclusion that the contracts were governed by English law and that the ITF’s conduct, though lawful in Sweden, could constitute economic duress under English law, entitling Dimskal to recover monies paid under the agreements. The core legal principles discussed — economic duress, the relevance of the governing law of the contract, and the inapplicability of the lex loci actus to questions of contractual validity — remain good law. The article does not materially misstate the outcome, though readers should note the definitive judgment is the House of Lords decision rather than the Court of Appeal. There have been no subsequent statutory or judicial developments that would undermine the principles set out here, and economic duress remains a well-established doctrine in English contract law. Students should refer to the House of Lords report for authoritative citation.
