WN Hillas & Co Ltd v Arcos Ltd [1932]
Share
WN Hillas & Co Ltd v Arcos Ltd [1932] UKHL 2 stands as a landmark House of Lords case in English contract law, marking a departure from a strict literal interpretation of contract terms. The court, in this case, embraced the idea of interpreting contracts to uphold the underlying bargain, allowing judges to imply terms based on the parties' past dealings rather than rendering the agreement void.
Hillas & Company engaged in purchasing timber from Arcos. An agreement was reached for the purchase of 22,000 standards of timber, with a crucial condition allowing Hillas the option to enter into a contract the following year for the purchase of 100,000 standards, entailing a 5% reduction in price. However, Arcos refused to sell the additional 100,000 standards the next year, leading to a legal dispute.
Lord Wright, in delivering the court's opinion, articulated the principle that individuals who provide good consideration can bind themselves to a duty to negotiate in good faith. This decision was notable for its departure from a strict contractual formalism. However, it's important to note that this perspective on good faith negotiation was later rejected in the controversial House of Lords case Walford v Miles [1992].
In conclusion, the case of WN Hillas & Co Ltd v Arcos Ltd exemplifies a significant shift in contract law, emphasising the importance of interpreting contracts in a manner that preserves the parties' intended agreements, even if it involves implying terms based on their prior dealings.
Hillas & Company engaged in purchasing timber from Arcos. An agreement was reached for the purchase of 22,000 standards of timber, with a crucial condition allowing Hillas the option to enter into a contract the following year for the purchase of 100,000 standards, entailing a 5% reduction in price. However, Arcos refused to sell the additional 100,000 standards the next year, leading to a legal dispute.
Lord Wright, in delivering the court's opinion, articulated the principle that individuals who provide good consideration can bind themselves to a duty to negotiate in good faith. This decision was notable for its departure from a strict contractual formalism. However, it's important to note that this perspective on good faith negotiation was later rejected in the controversial House of Lords case Walford v Miles [1992].
In conclusion, the case of WN Hillas & Co Ltd v Arcos Ltd exemplifies a significant shift in contract law, emphasising the importance of interpreting contracts in a manner that preserves the parties' intended agreements, even if it involves implying terms based on their prior dealings.
