Tsakiroglou & Co. Limited v. Noblee Thorl Gesellschaft mit beschrankter Haftung
House of Lords
AC 93 (1962)
- Written by Ryan McCarthy, JD
Facts
Noblee Thorl G.m.b.H (Noblee) (plaintiff) entered a cost, insurance, and freight (c.i.f.) contract to purchase Sudanese groundnuts from Tsakiroglou & Co. Ltd. (Tsakiroglou) (defendant) to be delivered in Hamburg. When the contract was entered, almost all shipments of nuts from Sudan traveled through the Suez Canal. However, it was possible, though rare, to ship the nuts by way of the Cape of Good Hope, but it was a significantly longer route. Before the nuts were shipped, a military conflict blocked the use of the Suez Canal. Tsakiroglou never shipped the nuts, and Noblee demanded arbitration for breach of contract. An arbitration panel awarded Noblee, the buyer, damages. Tsakiroglou challenged the arbitration award in court. The trial court upheld the arbitration award, and the court of appeals affirmed the judgment. Tsakiroglou appealed to the House of Lords, arguing that it was not liable for delivery of the nuts, because the contract was frustrated by the closing of the Suez Canal.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Viscount, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 777,000 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.