CMA CGM, S.A. v. Waterfront Container Leasing Co.

82 UCC Rep. Serv. 2d 259, 2013 WL 6576792 (2013)

From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

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)

KL
Play video

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…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 815,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

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.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,300 briefs - keyed to 988 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership