Kyocera Corp. v. Hemlock Semiconductor, LLC
Michigan Court of Appeals
886 N.W.2d 445 (2015)
- Written by John Reeves, JD
Facts
Kyocera Corporation (plaintiff), a Japanese company, manufactured solar panels. Hemlock Semiconductor, LLC (defendant), a Michigan company, manufactured polysilicon, an essential component of solar panels. In 2005 Kyocera and Hemlock entered into a take-or-pay contract under which Kyocera agreed to purchase polysilicon from Hemlock for a fixed price over four years. Kyocera assumed all risk that would result if the price fell, and Hemlock assumed all the risk if the price rose. At the time, there was a shortage of polysilicon, and the price was relatively high. The contract contained a force majeure provision providing that neither party would be held liable in the event a government act rendered performance of the contract impossible. Over the next several years, the Chinese government gave illegal subsidies to Chinese solar panel companies, enabling them to purchase polysilicon at a much lower price. This resulted in the market price of polysilicon greatly dropping. But Hemlock insisted that Kyocera was still obligated to pay for the polysilicon at the original contracted-for price, which by this time was far higher than the market price. Kyocera sued Hemlock, arguing that the force majeure provision of the contract excused it from performing. The trial court dismissed the case, and Kyocera appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Boonstra, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 796,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,200 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.