Krell v Henry  2 KB 740<
72 LJKB 794; 52 WR 246; [1900-3] All ER Rep 20; 89 LT 328; 19 TLR 711
CONTRACT, CONTRACTUAL TERMS, FAILURE OF FUTURE EVENT, FOUNDATION OF A CONTRACT, SUBSTANCE OF CONTRACT, IMPOSSIBILITY OF PERFORMANCE, INFERRENCE, IMPLIED TERMS
By contract in writing of 20 June 1902, the defendant agreed to hire from the plaintiff a flat in Pall Mall on 26 June and 27 June, on which days it had been announced that the coronation processions would take place and pass along Pall Mall. The contract did not contain any express terms on the coronation processions or any other purposes for which the flat was to be hired. The defendant paid the deposit upon signing the contract. The processions, however, did not take place on the announced dates. As a result, the defendant declined to pay the balance of the agreed rent.
Was the defendant obliged to pay the rent despite the fact that the processions did not take place as planned?
The decision was in favour of the defendant.
(1) Applying Taylor v Caldwell (1863) 3 B & S 826,as both parties recognised that they regarded the taking place of the coronation processions on the days originally fixed as the foundation of the contract, the words of the obligation on the defendant to pay for the use of the flat for the days named were not used with reference to the possibility that the processions might not take place.
(2) The plaintiff was not entitled to recover the balance of the rent fixed by the contract.
Cite This Essay
To export a reference to this article please select a referencing style below: