header-logo header-logo

27 September 2013 / Siobhan Jones
Issue: 7577 / Categories: Features , Property
printer mail-detail

Up the Telford Creekside

istock_000013007379medium

The law on repudiation has been given welcome clarification, as Siobhan Jones reports

The remedy of repudiation entitles an innocent party to a contract to treat itself as discharged from its obligations under the contract (and the contract as terminated) in circumstances where the defaulting party is in breach. To effect a repudiation and terminate the contract the innocent party must elect to “accept” the repudiatory breach. If the innocent party instead elects to affirm the contract, the contract will not be terminated and the obligations under it will continue.

Questions have abounded as to whether a repudiatory breach can be “cured” (thus depriving the innocent party of the remedy), the distinction between actual and anticipated breaches, and the date on which an assessment of breach is to be made. These questions were neatly dealt with by the Court of Appeal in Telford Homes (Creekside) Limited v Ampurius Nu Homes Holdings Limited [2013] EWCA Civ 577; [2013] All ER (D) 305 (May).

The law

One of the most important authorities in this

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

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Dual-qualified partner joins as head of commercial property department

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Firm announces appointment of next chair

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Director joins corporate team from the US

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll