header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
04 April 2014
Issue: 7601 / Categories: Case law , Law reports , In Court
printer mail-detail

Contract—Repudiation—Anticipatory breach

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

Geden Operations Ltd v Dry Bulk Handy Holdings Inc [2014] EWHC 885 (Comm), [2014] All ER (D) 271 (Mar)

Queen’s Bench Division, Commercial Court, Popplewell J, 28 Mar 2014

There is no principle of law whereby a party who has made his performance dependent on a discretion to be exercised by a third party is ipso facto deemed to be evincing an intention not to perform.

Charles Kimmins QC and Thomas Corby (instructed by Lax & Co) for the charterparty. Timothy Hill QC and Jeremy Lightfoot (instructed by Ince & Co) for the owners.

In July 2010 the parties entered into a time charterparty on an amended NYPE form for about 35 to 37 months. The vessel was still under construction at the time. Clause 8 provided in the usual way that the captain was to be under the orders and directions of the charterers. The charter also contained a Conwartime 2004 clause on an amended BIMCO piracy clause. The amendments deleted paras (a) and (b) so as to enable

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
Sponsored by
London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

Fieldfisher partner appointed president as LSLA marks milestone year

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Firm promotes two lawyers to partnership across employment and family

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Firm promotes five lawyers to partnership across key growth areas

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Your magistrates’ court needs you!
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
NLJ this week: Clarity on whistleblowing, settlements and tribunal limits
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll