Tool Metal v Tungsten Electric [1955] 1 WLR 761 (H.L.)
Country:
United Kingdom
Reviewed By Oxbridge Law Team
Updated 2024-01-04 06:59:11 UTC
Defendant had to pay Plaintiff royalties for creating and selling its product, and paying compensation when it produced in excess of a certain volume.
The right to compensation was suspended during WWII and Plaintiff tried to reinstate it in 1945.
The HL ruled that “reasonable notice” had to be given in order to resume strict legal contractual rights.
This was determined basically on account of what would be “equitable” i.e. fair.
Any comments or edits about this case?
Get in touch Similar cases
Winter Garden Theatre v Millenium Productions
Plaintiff sold Defendant a license to show plays for 6 months, including an option to renew the licence for another 6 months, and at the end of the second period, to renew their license at a set rate...
Hughes v Metropolitan Rly
Plaintiff was a lessee of property that Defendant served a repair notice which had to be complied with within a time limit or Plaintiff would face ejection. Plaintiff offered to sell the property to...
Dunlop v New Garage
Plaintiff made a contract with Defendant to sell Plaintiff’s goods. Within the contract was a requirement that the goods aren’t sold below a certain price and for every good that is sold below that p...
Experience Hendrix LLC v PPX Enterprises Inc
Defendant had a contract with Plaintiff governing the royalties and use of material of Jimi Hendrix. It was impossible to quantify the claimant’s financial loss, so the court ordered him to pay a “re...
Sky Petroleum v VIP Petroleum
Claimant would buy all its petrol from the defendant who agreed to supply all the claimant’s needs. The defendants purported to terminate the contract at a time when supplies were limited and an inte...
Ambitious and intelligent students
choose Oxbridge Notes.
- Customer Support
- Sellers FAQ
- Contact Us
- Privacy Policy
- Terms and Conditions
©2024 Oxbridge Notes. All right reserved.