Port Line v Ben Line [1958] 2 QB 146
Judgement for the case Port Line v Ben Line
Table Of Contents
X contracted to give Plaintiff a charter, before selling the boat to Defandant.
Defendant gave X a charter for the remaining period of P’s entitled use of the boat (so as to allow X to honour its contract with P) but demanded a clause, which X accepted, that if the boat was requisitioned then the charter would cease. The boat was requisitioned, but when returned the charter would still have 7 months on it.
Plaintiff sued for the remaining months.
Defendant didn’t realise that no similar clause was contained in the agreement between X and Plaintiff.
QBD held that the equity principle of Strathcona was wrong and that, even if it was right, this case was distinguished since here D was not acting inequitably: he was unaware of the non-existence of the clause.
QBD also said that Plaintiff should really be suing X for breach of contract.
RELATED CASES
For Further Study on Port Line v Ben Line
These are detailed case summaries (excerpts from cases - not paraphrase...
A collection of the best Personal Property Law notes the director of Ox...
Shipping and International Trade Law notes fully updated for recent exa...
Need instant answers? Our AI exam tutor is here to help.
Ask questions 🙋 Get answers 📔 It's simple 👁️👄👁️
Our AI is educated by the highest scoring students across all subjects and schools. Join hundreds of your peers today.
Get StartedSimilar Cases
Related Product Samples
These product samples contain the same concepts we cover in this case.
| Shipping and International Trade | Charterparties And Freight Notes (45 pages) |
| Commercial Remedies BCL | The Alaskan Trader Notes (4 pages) |
| Personal Property Law | Types Of Property Rights Notes (17 pages) |
Contract law notes fully updated for recent exams at Oxford and Cambrid...
Since 2010, Oxbridge Notes has been a trusted education marketplace, supplying high-quality materials from top achievers at universities like Oxford, Cambridge, LSE, Harvard, and Yale.