header-logo header-logo

01 August 2013
Issue: 7571 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Shipping

Great Elephant Corporation v Trafigura Beheer BV and other companies [2013] EWCA Civ 905, [2013] All ER (D) 315 (Jul)

It was settled law that a force majeure clause had to be construed in accordance with its own terms. A force majeure clause was an exceptions clause and any ambiguity had to be resolved against the party seeking to rely on it, and the concept of being “beyond [a corporate person's] control” set a comparatively high hurdle since corporations usually did have a significant measure of control over their own business.

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

Sharpe Pritchard—Victoria Heald-Barraclough

Sharpe Pritchard—Victoria Heald-Barraclough

Magic Circle hire strengthens Sharpe Pritchard’s infrastructure finance capability

Lewis Silkin—Iskander Fernandez

Lewis Silkin—Iskander Fernandez

Lewis Silkin adds corporate crime specialist to growing dispute resolution team

Morr & Co—Michael Charalambous

Morr & Co—Michael Charalambous

Morr Co strengthens private client team with partner appointment

NEWS
Should every solicitor found to have acted dishonestly face automatic striking off? The answer, argues John Gould, chair of Russell-Cooke LLP in NLJ this week, is no 
Winning an arbitral award against a state is one thing; enforcing it is another
Can government success in court tell us whether the rule of law is healthy? 
Poorly drafted dispute resolution clauses can trigger litigation before the real dispute is even addressed
As cryptocurrency becomes mainstream, family lawyers are increasingly confronting the challenges it creates on divorce
back-to-top-scroll