• Order
  • Offers
  • Support
    • Due to unforeseen circumstances, our phone line will be unavailable from 5pm to 9pm GMT on Thursday, 28th March. Please be assured that orders will continue to be processed as usual during this period. For any queries, you can still contact us through your customer portal, where our team will be ready to assist you.

      March 28, 2024

  • Sign In

Disclaimer: This work was produced by one of our expert legal writers, as a learning aid to help law students with their studies.

Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not reflect the views of LawTeacher.net. Any information contained in this case summary does not constitute legal advice and should be treated as educational content only.

Fercometal v Mediterranean

355 words (1 pages) Case Summary

14th Jun 2019 Case Summary Reference this In-house law team

Jurisdiction / Tag(s): UK Law

Fercometal SARL v Mediterranean Shipping Co. SA [1989] AC 788

The effect of a wrongful repudiation of contract.

Facts

Charterers entered into an agreement with ship owners for a cargo in the vessel ‘Simona.’ A clause of the agreement allowed the charterers the option of termination if the vessel was not ready to load by 9 July 1982. The charterers gave notice to cancel the contract prematurely, thus repudiating the contract. The owners did not accept the repudiation and continued loading the vessel, tendering a notice of readiness on 8 July. However, the vessel was not ready. The owners claimed for damages for wrongful repudiation.

Issues

The question arose as to (1) the effect of the wrongful repudiation on the obligations of the innocent party and (2) whether the charterers lost their right to terminate the contract by their prior repudiation.

Decision/Outcome

Firstly, the Court held that one party’s wrongful repudiation and failure to perform a contract does not have the legal effect of terminating the contract. In the case of wrongful repudiation by one party, the non-repudiating party has the option of either accepting the repudiation or affirming the contract by continuing to fulfil their obligations. If the innocent party affirms the contract, he must continue to tender performance thereof. On the facts, after the charterer’s wrongful repudiation, the vessel owners affirmed the continuance of the contract, yet failed to fulfil their obligations by tendering the vessel ready to load on time. Secondly, an unaccepted wrongful repudiation does not cancel a contractual right of termination. Thus, the charterers’ unaccepted repudiation does not effect their right of termination if the vessel is not ready by 9 July. As the owners continued to affirm the existence of the contract and failed to tender the ready vessel on 9 July, the charterers are able to exercise their contractual right of termination under the existing contractual clause with no damages.

Word Count: 307

Cite This Work

To export a reference to this article please select a referencing stye below:

Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.

Related Services

View all

Related Content

Jurisdictions / Tags

Content relating to: "UK Law"

UK law covers the laws and legislation of England, Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland. Essays, case summaries, problem questions and dissertations here are relevant to law students from the United Kingdom and Great Britain, as well as students wishing to learn more about the UK legal system from overseas.

Related Articles