Huyton S.A. v Peter Cremer G.m.b.H. & Company
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Court | Queen's Bench Division (Commercial Court) |
| Judgment Date | 1999 |
| Year | 1999 |
| Date | 1999 |
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial
29 cases
-
Times Travel (UK) Ltd v Pakistan International Airlines Corporation
...McHugh JA's judgment in Crescendo, as quoted by Lord Goff in Dimskal Shipping, Mance J's judgment in Huyton SA v Peter Cremer GmbH & Co [1999] 1 Lloyd's Rep 620 at 637–8 and the Privy Council's judgment in Borelli v Ting. He referred also to Cooke J's judgment in Progress Bulk Carriers and ......
-
Terna Bahrain Holding Company Wll v Ali Marzook Ali Bin Kamil Al Shamsi and Others
... ... 66 ; Zermalt Holdings SA v NU-Life Upholstery Repairs Limited [1985] 2 EGLR 14 ; inmetals Germany GmbH v Ferco Steel Ltd [1999] 1 All ER (Comm) 315 ; Westland ... ...
-
Claxton Engineering Services Ltd v TXM Olaj–és Gázkutató Kft
...agreement —see Raphael "The anti-suit injunction" paragraph 11. 20. 43 An analogous situation arose in Huyton SA v Peter Cremer GmbH and Co [1999] 1 Lloyd's Rep 620. In that case it was held there was an agreement not to arbitrate, and in light of that determination the court granted an inj......
-
Pakistan International Airline Corporation v Times Travel (UK) Ltd
... ... Dimskal Shipping Co SA v International Transport Workers Federation (The ... Huyton SA v Peter Cremer GmbH & Co [1999] CLC ... to obtain a guarantee from a family company. Joseph Wetton obtained a lorry on hire purchase ... ...
Get Started for Free
4 books & journal articles
-
Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v. C.G. Berbatis Holdings Pty. Ltd.; curbing unconscionability: Berbatis in the High Court of Australia.
...also to be finding its way into modern English decisions on the duress doctrine: see, eg, Huyton SA v Peter Cremer GmbH & Co [1999] 1 Lloyd's Rep 620, 637 (Mance (120) See, eg, Equiticorp Finance Ltd (in liq) v Bank of New Zealand (1993) 32 NSWLR 50, 107. In that case, Kirby P saw wisdo......
-
Canadian contractual duress and criminal duress: "irrational, anomalous, perverse, illogical and fundamentally wrong" or just misunderstood?
...1309. (405.) Id. at 1272. (406.) Id. at 1309. (407.) Colvin, supra note 397, at 223. (408.) Huyton S.A. v. Peter Cremer GmbH & Co, [1999] 1 Lloyd's Rep. 620 (K.B.) (Eng.); see also ENONCHONG, supra note 20, at (409.) Barton v Armstrong (1975) 2 W.L.R. 1050, 1062 (P.C.) (Austl.). (410.) Id. ......
-
The future of the doctrine of economic duress in South African contract law: The influence of Roman-Dutch law, English law and the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996
...pressure t o be ‘a signi cant cause’ of ent ering in to the contrac t. On the other hand, Huyton SA v Peter Cre mer GmbH & Co [1999] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 620 requ ired satisf action of the ‘ but for’ test as wel l as there bei ng no reasona ble altern ative to succumbi ng to the contract.47 [1984......
-
The future of the doctrine of economic duress in South African contract law: The influence of Roman-Dutch law, English law and the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996
...pressure t o be ‘a signi cant cause’ of ent ering in to the contrac t. On the other hand, Huyton SA v Peter Cre mer GmbH & Co [1999] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 620 requ ired satisf action of the ‘ but for’ test as wel l as there bei ng no reasona ble altern ative to succumbi ng to the contract.47 [1984......
