CMA CGM, S.A. v. Waterfront Container Leasing Co.
United States District Court for the Northern District of California
82 UCC Rep. Serv. 2d 259, 2013 WL 6576792 (2013)

- Written by Kate Luck, JD
Facts
CMA CGM, S.A. (CMA) (plaintiff) leased 7,271 shipping containers from Waterfront Container Leasing Company (Waterfront) (defendant). The parties’ leasing contract granted CMA the option to purchase the containers at the conclusion of the lease at a certain price, provided that CMA complied with the procedures outlined in the contract. CMA gave Waterfront notice of its desire to purchase the containers in accordance with the contract. Waterfront improperly denied CMA the option to purchase the containers in breach of the contract. Over several months, CMA began returning the containers to Waterfront, and Waterfront sold the containers to new customers. CMA brought suit against Waterfront for breach of contract, seeking specific performance of the contract. Both parties moved for summary judgment. Because CMA still had more than 3,000 containers in its possession, it argued that specific performance was the most practical remedy. Waterfront argued that specific performance was not appropriate, because CMA could cover its damages by purchasing replacement containers from a new vendor and obtaining damages for the difference between the cost of the new containers and the purchase price in the contract. The parties agreed that if specific performance was not awarded, it would take CMA six months to return the remaining containers and that Waterfront would have to sell the remaining containers before damages could be calculated.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Corley, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.