Huyton S.A. v Peter Cremer G.m.b.H. & Company
Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
Judgment Date | 1999 |
Date | 1999 |
Court | Queen's Bench Division (Commercial Court) |
-
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
View this document and try vLex for 7 days - TRY VLEX
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
29 cases
-
Pakistan International Airline Corporation v Times Travel (UK) Ltd
...(UK) Ltd [2007] EWHC 3481 (QB), CTN Cash and Carry Ltd v Gallaher Ltd [1994] 4 All ER 714, Huyton SA v Peter Cremer GmbH & Co [1999] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 620 and Thorne v Motor Trade Association [1937] AC 797. It focuses wrongly on the state of mind of the coercer and has nothing to do with whethe......
-
Sheikh Tahnoon Bin Saeed Bin Shakhboot Al Nehayan v Ioannis Kent (Aka John Kent)
...(at 46) said that “[p]ressure will be illegitimate if it consists of unlawful threats or amounts to unconscionable conduct”. In Huyton SA v Peter Cremer GmbH & Co [1999] 1 Lloyd's Rep 620, 637–8; [1999] CLC 230, 250–2, Mance J (as he was) cited these authorities and identified the rational......
-
Oliver Dean Morley t/a Morley Estates v The Royal Bank of Scotland Plc
...v. International Transport Workers' Federation [1991] 2 AC 152, 165; as explained by Mance J (as he then was) in Huyton v. Cremer [1999] 1 Lloyds Rep 620, 636, setting as a minimum a “but for” test whereby the illegitimate pressure must have “actually caused” the making of, or the terms of......
-
Progress Bulk Carriers Ltd v Tube City Ims LLC
...terms of the question of law posed for the court). The one authority to which reference was made by the Arbitrators in their reasons is Huyton v Cremer [1999] 1 Lloyds Rep 620, a decision of Mance J (as he then was) in which he set out the requirements for economic duress, at page 630 he sa......
Request a trial to view additional results
6 books & journal articles
-
THE USE AND ABUSE OF ANTI-ARBITRATION INJUNCTIONS
...Com Cas 116. 20Malmesbury Railway Co v Budd(1876) 2 Ch D 113; Beddow v Beddow(1878) 9 Ch D 89. 21Huyton SA v Peter Cremer GmbH & Co[1999] 1 Lloyd's Rep 620 at 623 and 642. 22Compagnie Européenne de Céréales SA v Tradax Export SA[1986] 2 Lloyd's Rep 301 at 305–306. 23Claxton Engineering Serv......
-
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......
-
VITIATING FACTORS IN CONTRACT LAW — SOME KEY CONCEPTS AND DEVELOPMENTS
...which problem has now been settled by the case law: see generally Phang, supra n 1, at 34—35, and the literature cited therein. 178 [1999] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 620. 179 See the Australian Privy Council decision of Barton v Armstrong[1976] AC 104. 180 Supra n 178 at 636. 181 See the English Court o......
-
EQUITY AND OPPORTUNISM IN THE LAW OF CONTRACT:
...p 324. 102 Mindy Chen-Wishart, Contract Law (Oxford University Press, 5th Ed, 2015) at p 337. 103Huyton SA v Peter Cremer GmbH & Co[1999] 1 Lloyds Rep 620 at 636. 104Universe Tankships, Inc of Monrovia v International Transport Workers Federation[1983] 1 AC 366 at 400. 105Huyton SA v Peter ......
Request a trial to view additional results