In URE ENERGY LTD v NOTTING HILL GENESIS (2024) EWHC 2537 ( Comm ) an energy company was held not to have waived its right to terminate an electricity supply contract even though it had continued to perform its contractual obligations for six months after a contractually specified termination event. Although the company’s controlling mind knew that the contract contained a termination clause , he did not appreciate, and could not be expected to have appreciated, that it gave the company a right to terminate in the circumstances which transpired. The Court applied the principles on waiver. Where a party became entitled to terminate a contract it had to elect whether to exercise that right or not . To make an election, it had to be aware of its right to terminate and the facts giving rise to that right. If, having the requisite knowledge, it acted in a manner that was consistent with only one of the two courses, it would be held to have elected accordingly.

This entry was posted on Thursday, October 17th, 2024 at 9:43 am and is filed under Decision making and Contracts. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Responses are currently closed, but you can trackback from your own site.