- Courturier v Hastie
-
Courturier v Hastie 
Court House of Lords Citation(s) [1856] UKHL J3, (1856) 5 HLC 673 Keywords Frustration, common mistake Courturier v Hastie [1856] UKHL J3 is an English contract law case, concerning common mistake between two contracting parties about the possibility of performance of an agreement.
Contents
Facts
Courturier agreed with Hastie to deliver some corn. They thought it was in transit between Salonica (now Thessaloniki) and the UK. But the corn had already decayed. The shipmaster had sold it. Courturier argued that Hastie was liable for the corn because Hastie had already bought an ‘interest in the adventure’, or rights under the shipping documents.
Judgment
The House of Lords held that because the corn effectively did not exist at the time of the contract, there was a toal failure of consideration and the buyers way not liable to pay the price.
See also
Sources for impossibility Paradine v Jane [1647] EWHC KB J5Courturier v Hastie [1856] UKHL J3Taylor v Caldwell [1863] EWHC QB J1Krell v Henry [1903] 2 KB 740Bell v Lever Brothers Ltd [1931] UKHL 2Maritime Fish Ltd v Ocean Trawlers Ltd [1935] UKPC 1Fibrosa Spolka v Fairbairn Lawson Ltd [1942] UKHL 4Law Reform (Frustrated Contracts) Act 1943 (c 40)Fraser & Co v Denny Mott & Dickson Ltd [1944] UKHL 3Solle v Butcher [1950] 1 KB 671McRae v Commonwealth Disposals [1951] HCA 79Davis Contractors Ltd v Fareham UDC [1956] UKHL 3John Walker & Sons Ltd [1977] 1 WLR 164National Carriers Ltd v Panalpina (Northern) Ltd [1980] UKHL 8The Superservant Two [1989] EWCA Civ 6Gamerco SA v ICM Fair Warning Ltd [1995] EWHC QB 1The Great Peace [2002] EWCA Civ 1407See common mistake and frustration in English law- English contract law
- Frustration in English law
- Sale of Goods Act 1979 s 6
- McRae v Commonwealth Disposals Commission (1951) 84 CLR 377
Notes
References
External links
Categories:- English contract case law
Wikimedia Foundation. 2010.
