Appellant’s Statement of the Case and Facts
Appellant’s Statement of the Case and Facts
Appellant’s Statement代写 This appellant statement of case and facts arose from the decision made by Patel J in the high court .
Appellant’s Statement of the Case and Facts
This appellant statement of case and facts arose from the decision made by Patel J in the high court which rendered the judgment in favor of Pup Shelters Ltd after a trial in which the defendant repudiated the contract with the plaintiff. The allegations were that the defendant wrongfully repudiated the agreement under which the plaintiff claimed to be an innominate term. Appellant’s Statement代写**成品
The defendant repudiated the deal on the basis that the cans in which the dog foods were packed were defective and therefore amounted to the breach of condition. The plaintiff had argued that the condition did not amount to substantial damages to the goods delivered to warrant a breach of contract. It was also evident that the dented cans did not affect the actual quality of the dog food.
Regardless of the facts argument as pertained to the contract. The defendant won the case which the plaintiff felt the need to appeal on the following grounds:
1.That the judgment in the case was erred when the judge held that the term “The cans of dog food supplied must be in good condition” amounted contractual condition rather than the condition. The argument will be based on a precedent case in Hong Kong Fir Shipping Co Ltd v Kawasaki Kisen Kaisha Ltd  2 QB 26 that held that the term was innominate, and
2.The judgment was erred when it failed to hold the repudiation of the contract by the Pup Shelters Ltd as the breach to the contract. This about the decision made in Cehave NV v Bremer (The Hansa Nord)  QB 44. Which held that the breach was not serious and hence sufficient enough to amount to a repudiation of the contract.
Judgment Appellant’s Statement代写
Regarding the above grounds, Dogs Dinners Ltd felt that the judgment failed to use the case precedents which are considered superior in the determination of subsequent cases. As such, the UK is a common law country and such judgment and case law reported have the particularly essential doctrine of precedent that can be applied in subsequent cases. It is construed that the decision of each case reported can be binding to all following cases depending on the seniority of the court. In essence, the use of case laws was out of necessity to have uniformity in offering judgments in the court of law. Therefore, in this expressly and implied condition. It validates the above mention cases the basis of the argument in terms of case law in the current case.
Case law 1 Appellant’s Statement代写
A case law formed in the case Hong Kong Fir Shipping Co Ltd v Kawasaki Kisen Kaisha Ltd  2 QB 26 shows the construction of contractual terms as “conditions” and repudiatory breach of contract. Although the agreement between Hong Kong Fir Shipping Ltd and Kisen Kaisha Ltd stipulated that:
1.The owner of the ship to deliver the seaworthy ship to the charterers, and
2.Maintain the vessel’s seaworthiness and good condition
The condition precedents were construed to be innominate terms which did not permit repudiation of the contract. Appellant’s Statement代写
It was observed that the breach of the innominate terms warranted suit for damages depending on the holistic assessment of the conditions that led to the breach. The court was for the view that the seaworthiness and maintenance were not fundamental to form the condition of the contract. But its breach allowed for damage claim. Also, the court observed that a contract could not be repudiated because there was a delay, regardless of how significant. If it did not lead to the frustration of the contract and hence make performance impossible. Appellant’s Statement代写**成品
In the case of Hong Kong Fir Shipping Co Ltd v Kawasaki Kisen Kaisha Ltd  2 QB 26, the delays, although severe and repeated, did not amount to the frustration of the contract that would have led to repudiation but rather charterers were entitled to damages.
Case law 2 Appellant’s Statement代写
Similarly, the case law in Cehave NV v Bremer (The Hansa Nord)  QB 44 ruled on the case in the favor lacking substantial breach and presence of intermediate terms. The contract was based on the contract of sales under the Sales of Good Act 1893. The clause in contract stipulated that the shipment of goods from the German to the Dutch company “to be made in good condition.” Some of the products were defective. However, they were in usable condition for the intended purpose. The question was on the breach of contract condition and whether the violation was substantial to warrant repudiation of the contract of sales.
The Sales of Goods Act Appellant’s Statement代写
The court held that the terms to the contract were intermediate and the breach of “good condition” was not substantial enough to the root of the contract. According to the Sales of Goods Act 1893, a sales contract can only be repudiated. If there is a breach of contract condition or that it is substantial to the entire contract. Regarding this, the buyer did not have the right to reject the entire shipment. Because few goods were not in good condition. Appellant’s Statement代写**成品
The breach for this condition was construed to be the breach of the intermediate term. Which gives the buyer claim to damages. Also, the argument put forth by the court is that the damaged goods were in a usable condition and can be used for the intended purpose. As such, it amounted to a non-substantial breach of a term that affects the whole contract. Notably, the buyer was entitled to accept the shipment and claim damages for the breach of intermediate terms. Appellant’s Statement代写**成品
Therefore, about the above cases, the current case is corresponding to the presented facts and arguments.
Below are the facts to the current case:
1. Appellant’s Statement代写
According to the Hong Kong Fir Shipping Co Ltd v Kawasaki Kisen Kaisha Ltd  2 QB 26, to determine the contract condition, the holistic assessment of the contract’s situation has to be considered to assess the intention of the clause “The cans of dog food supplied must be in good condition.” The clause intended to remedy for the damaged goods delivered which go to the root of the contract. Appellant’s Statement代写**成品
If the breach did not amount to the frustration of the contract and hence make the goods unusable. Regardless of any other fault that might have been caused by it. The buyer was not supposed to treat the contract as repudiated. As such, the buyer was not entitled to reject the shipment but accept it and claim damages for defective cans.
2. Appellant’s Statement代写
According to Cehave NV v Bremer (The Hansa Nord)  QB 44, for a breach to amount to repudiation. There must a breach of condition or the violation is substantial to affect the performance of the entire contract. In the current case, the damages were not significant to affect the whole consignment. Only a few cans were damaged, and the content was in good quality and hence did not affect the intended use. Appellant’s Statement代写**成品
The damages only amounted to breach of intermediate-term since it did not affect the performance of the contract. Therefore, according to the case, there was no substantial breach and the goods were in a good state and did not affect the intended use. The buyer would have accepted the consignment under the violation of innominate terms and claim the damages.
Arguments Appellant’s Statement代写
This case statement demonstrates the determination of the construction of contractual terms as the condition and repudiatory breach of contract. The high court judge failed to consider the above arguments of case laws. Which could have been directly replicated in the current case. The case precedents were decided by competent law judges and have been upheld for decades. It is clear that, if the case laws were considered, the high court judgment would be overturned. Although the determination of contractual condition in the current case was considered. The court needs to revisit the decision in the light of the above case precedents. Appellant’s Statement代写**成品
Respectfully, I appeal for this court to consider the decision in Dog Dinners Ltd v. Pup Shelters Ltd and hold that the judge at first instance erred in holding the term in the dispute a condition. And that the judge at the first instance erred in holding the breach was repudiatory.
Cehave NV v Bremer (The Hansa Nord)  QB 44.
Dog Dinners Ltd v Pup Shelters Ltd.
Hong Kong Fir Shipping Co Ltd v Kawasaki Kisen Kaisha Ltd  2 QB 26.