Bunge SSA v Nidera [2015] UKSC 43
Country:
United Kingdom
Reviewed By Oxbridge Law Team
Updated 2024-01-04 07:17:45 UTC
KEY POINTS
- Where there is an available market, the prima facie method for calculating damages is to compare the contract price with the market price of the goods at the expected delivery time.
- However, if the buyer had the opportunity to lessen the damages by finding a replacement contract in the market earlier, then the assessment of damages will consider the market price at that earlier date.
- The court also considered the effect of supervening events that occurred after the breach but before the assessment date. The court concluded that such a supervening event should be taken into account when assessing damages.
FACTS
- The case involves a dispute over a FOB sale contract between Nidera BV (the buyers) and Bunge SA (the sellers) for the purchase of 25,000 tonnes of Russian milling wheat. The contract was governed by the GAFTA Form 49, which is a standard form of FOB sale contract for goods delivered from central or eastern Europe.
- However, before the shipment could take place, Russia imposed an embargo on wheat exports from its territory. The sellers notified the buyers of the embargo and attempted to cancel the contract under GAFTA 49's Prohibition Clause. The buyers disagreed with the sellers' decision to cancel and treated it as a repudiation of the contract, which they accepted.
- The sellers later offered to reinstate the contract, but the buyers refused and initiated arbitration proceedings. At the arbitration, the parties agreed that the sellers were in breach of contract and that the buyers were entitled to damages. The main issue was the amount of damages the buyers should receive.
Explore more about
Bunge SSA v Nidera
COMMENTARY
- This decision reinforces the importance of assessing damages in contract cases based on the circumstances that existed at the time of the breach as well as supervening events, ensuring a fair and objective approach to the calculation of damages.
Any comments or edits about this case?
Get in touch Similar cases
Golden Strait Corporation v Nippon Kubishika Kaisha (The Golden Victory)
Damages should be assessed at the date of the trial rather than at the date of the breach or any intervening events. This approach ensures a fair and objective evaluation of damages, free from the in...
Transfield Shipping Inc v Mercator Shipping Inc (The Achilleas)
When determining the appropriate starting point for assessing damages, it is crucial to consider whether the loss claimed is of a kind or type that the party in breach should reasonably be deemed to...
Chaplin v Hicks
Contract breach may lead to damages. Determining the remoteness of damage involves a test of the damage that flows naturally from the breach and is in contemplation by the parties as a result of the...
British Westinghouse Electric v Underground Electric Railways
A party who suffers a breach of a contractual agreement is entitled to be compensated for the losses they have incurred as a result of the breach. However, this principle of compensation is tempered...
McRae v Commonwealth Disposals Commission
Damages are a legal concept that refers to the monetary compensation awarded to a party who has suffered harm or loss due to the actions or negligence of another. In various legal contexts, damages c...
Ambitious and intelligent students
choose Oxbridge Notes.
- Customer Support
- Sellers FAQ
- Contact Us
- Privacy Policy
- Terms and Conditions
©2024 Oxbridge Notes. All right reserved.