Source: All England Reporter
Publisher Citation: [2001] All ER (D) 367 (Feb)
Court: Court of Appeal, Civil Division
Judge:

Henry, Buxton LJJ and Sir Swinton Thomas

Representation Andrew Bartlett QC and Julian Field (instructed by Davies Arnold Cooper) for AW.
  William Norris QC and Andrew Phillips (instructed by Vizards Staples & Bannister) for Biachem.
  Roger ter Haar QC and Anna Guggenheim (instructed by Beachcroft Wansbroughs) for Berk.
Judgment Dates: 28 February 2001

Catchwords

Contract - Supply of goods - Delivery - Performance - Supply of chemicals - Chemicals intended for delivery to one site delivered to another - Incorrect delivery note - Chemicals mixed with resultant explosion - Proceedings issued - Determination of preliminary issues - Whether judge in error - s 34.

The Case

Breaches of contractual terms would not only arise where there had been actual and total performance of a contract. In the instant case, in the light of the judge's finding that the misdelivery of chemicals had constituted purported performance of the contract, his conclusion that the contractual terms had been breached by the defendants had not been wrong in principle, and on the facts before him, the judge had not been in error in making the findings regarding breaches of contractual terms that he had.

Practice Areas

If you are a LexisLibrary subscriber you can read more about this case here.