Torquay Hotel v Cousins [1969] 2 Ch 106
Judgement for the case Torquay Hotel v Cousins
Table Of Contents
Plaintiff (hotel) was supplied with fuel by E. Defendants (various union members, including fuel delivery drivers) put Plaintiff under a fuel embargo.
There was a force majeure clause in the contract between Plaintiff and E saying that neither would be liable if the contract wasn’t fulfilled due to labour disputes.
However Defendants were still made liable for interference with the performance of the contract by CA on the grounds that union leaders shouldn’t be able to take advantage of the force majeure clause in the contract between Plaintiff and E.
Lord Denning MR
The principle of interference with the contract should be extended to cover cases where the interference doesn’t cause any breach (as here)
Russell LJ (majority approach)
There still has to be breach of the contract to bring a claim for tortious interference.
However the force majeure clause is to be viewed as an exemption from liability for breach, and NOT preventing breach itself if there is a failure to deliver/take delivery of fuel.
For Further Study on Torquay Hotel v Cousins
Contract law notes fully updated for recent exams at Oxford and Cambrid...
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.
| Contract Law | Contract Law Problem Question Summary Notes (157 pages) |
Labour Law notes fully updated for recent exams at Oxford and Cambridge...
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.