Jupiter Import and Export CC v Global Fishing Enterprises CC (1 of 2014) [2019] NAHCMD 557 (16 December 2019)

Jupiter Import and Export CC v Global Fishing Enterprises CC (1 of 2014) [2019] NAHCMD 557 (16 December 2019)

Plaintiff failed to prove on a balance of probabilities that the defendant made false representations or breached the contract. The evidence did not establish that the fish was unfit for human consumption due to infestation at the time of delivery, nor that the representations regarding shelf life and imperishability were untrue. Risk of loss had passed to the plaintiff upon delivery. Plaintiff also failed to prove entitlement to damages or refund for undelivered cartons, as these were available for collection.

Citation
[2019] NAHCMD 557
Parties
Plaintiff: Jupiter Import and Export CC; Defendant: Global Fishing Enterprises CC
Court
High Court Main Division
Jurisdiction
Namibia
Judgment Date
16 December 2019
Case Number
1 of 2014
Procedural Posture
Civil / Judgment After Full Trial
Outcome
Plaintiff's claims dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
Material Misrepresentation, Breach of Contract, Damages, Agency Agreement, Implied Warranty
Source Language
English
Contract Law Material Misrepresentation Breach of Contract Damages Agency Agreement Implied Warranty

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jupiter Import and Export CC

Plaintiff

Global Fishing Enterprises CC

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Judgment After Full Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant made material misrepresentations inducing the plaintiff to enter the agreement
  2. 2 Whether the defendant breached the terms or implied warranties of the agreement
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiff was entitled to cancel the agreement and claim damages

Ratio Decidendi

Plaintiff failed to prove on a balance of probabilities that the defendant made false representations or breached the contract. The evidence did not establish that the fish was unfit for human consumption due to infestation at the time of delivery, nor that the representations regarding shelf life and imperishability were untrue. Risk of loss had passed to the plaintiff upon delivery. Plaintiff also failed to prove entitlement to damages or refund for undelivered cartons, as these were available for collection.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's claims dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • Plaintiff’s claims are dismissed with costs.
  • Plaintiff to pay defendant’s costs, including costs of one instructing and one instructed counsel.