Disclaimer: This work was produced by one of our professional writers as a learning aid to help you with your studies.
Any opinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of Parallelewelten.net.
If you would like to view samples of the work produced by our academic writers please click here.
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.
Related ServicesView all
DMCA / Removal Request
If you are the original writer of this essay and no longer wish to have the essay published on the UK Essays website then please.