In order to deliver a personalised, responsive service and to improve the site, we remember and store information about how you use it. This is done using simple text files called cookies which sit on your computer. By continuing to use this site and access its features, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
To find out more about the way Informa Law uses cookies please go to our Cookie Policy page. Close


Lloyd's Law Reporter


[2013] EWCA Civ 948, Court of Appeal, Civil Division, Lord Justice Moses, Lord Justice Tomlinson and Lord Justice Floyd, 25 July 2013

Contract - Variation - Applicable law - Rome Convention - Contracts (Applicable Law) Act 1990

A series of contracts had been negotiated under which Sapporo was to supply Chinese hops to Lupofresh. Some of the contracts had before being performed been renegotiated to the detriment of Lupofresh in a rising market for hops. Lupofresh had failed to pay the purchase price under one of the contracts and Sapporo claimed payment. Lupofresh counterclaimed, saying that the variations had been entered into under duress or misrepresentation. The contract terms were very brief, each contract taking the form of a purchase order on Lupofresh headed letter paper, with its address in Kent, addressed to Sapporo in Tokyo. The contracts were written in English and contained no express choice of law. At first instance, Bean J decided that the contracts were governed by Japanese law.

The rest of this document is only available to online subscribers.

If you are already a subscriber, please enter your details below to log in.

Enter your email address to log in as a user on your corporate account.
Remember me on this computer

Not yet an i-law subscriber?


Request a trial Find out more