This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Learn more

BCL Law Notes Commercial Remedies BCL Notes

Beswick V. Beswick Notes

Updated Beswick V. Beswick Notes

Commercial Remedies BCL Notes

Commercial Remedies BCL

Approximately 497 pages

These are detailed case summaries (excerpts from cases - not paraphrased) I made during the Oxford BCL for the Commercial Remedies course....

The following is a more accessible plain text extract of the PDF sample above, taken from our Commercial Remedies BCL Notes. Due to the challenges of extracting text from PDFs, it will have odd formatting:

Beswick v. Beswick

Facts

My Lords, before 1962 the respondent's deceased husband carried on business as a coal merchant. By agreement of March 14, 1962, he assigned to his nephew, the appellant, the assets of the business and the appellant undertook first to pay to him 6 10s. per week for the remainder of his life and then to pay to the respondent an annuity of 5 per week in the event of her husband's death. The husband died in November, 1963. Thereupon, the appellant made one payment of 5 to the respondent but he refused to make any further payment to her. The respondent now sues for 175 arrears of the annuity and for an order for specific performance of the continuing obligation to pay the annuity.

It so happens that the respondent is administratrix of the estate of her deceased husband and she sues both in that capacity and in her personal capacity.

Holding

Lord Reid

Widow is only entitled to nominal damages – unjust result

Applying what I have said to the circumstances of the present case, the respondent in her personal capacity has no right to sue, but she has a right as administratrix of her husband's estate to require the appellant to perform his obligation under the agreement. He has refused to do so and he maintains that the respondent's only right is to sue him for damages for breach of his contract. If that were so, I shall assume that he is right in maintaining that the administratrix could then only recover nominal damages because his breach of contract has caused no loss to the estate of her deceased husband.

If that were the only remedy available the result would be grossly unjust. It would mean that the appellant keeps the business which he bought and for which he has only paid a small part of the price which he agreed to pay. He would avoid paying the rest of the price, the annuity to the respondent, by paying a mere 40s. damages.

Order for specific performance

The respondent's second argument is that she is entitled in her capacity of administratrix of her deceased husband's estate to enforce the provision of the agreement for the benefit of herself in her personal capacity, and that a proper way of enforcing that provision is to order specific performance. That would produce a just result, and, unless there is some technical objection, I am of opinion that specific performance ought to be ordered. For the reasons given by your Lordships I would reject the arguments submitted for the appellant that specific performance is not a possible remedy in this case. I am therefore of opinion that the Court of Appeal reached a correct decision and that this appeal should be dismissed.

Lord Hudson

The peculiar feature of this case is that the plaintiff is not only the personal representative of the deceased but also his widow and the person beneficially entitled to the money claimed. Although the widow cannot claim specific performance in her personal capacity, there is no objection to her doing so in her capacity as administratrix, and when the moneys are recovered they will be in this instance held for the benefit of herself as the...

Buy the full version of these notes or essay plans and more in our Commercial Remedies BCL Notes.

More Commercial Remedies Bcl Samples