Spring Salmon and Seafood Ltd v. Wisco Processing Ltd & Ors [2004] ScotCS 220 (29 September 2004)

Spring Salmon and Seafood Ltd v. Wisco Processing Ltd & Ors [2004] ScotCS 220 (29 September 2004)

The court found that the agreement between the parties was limited to not offering or supplying salmon products to Oscar Mayer for a period of one year, expiring in August 2003. Tendering for supply contracts after the expiry did not constitute breach. Smoked salmon was not included in 'salmon products' under the agreement. The defenders' admitted breach for supply during July-August 2002 was actionable, but no breach occurred in relation to tendering or supply after the expiry date.

Citation
[2004] ScotCS 220
Parties
Pursuer: Spring Salmon and Seafood Limited; First Defender: Wisco Processing Limited; Second Defender: Pieters Visbedrijf NV; Third Defender: Fjord Seafood Chile SA
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
29 September 2004
Procedural Posture
Commercial Action / Proof Before Answer (restricted to Merits)
Outcome
Claim partially upheld
Legal Topics
Breach of Contract, Non Circumvention Agreements, Tendering Process, Supply Agreements
Contract Law Commercial Law Breach of Contract Non Circumvention Agreements Tendering Process Supply Agreements

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 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Spring Salmon and Seafood Limited

Pursuer

Wisco Processing Limited

First Defender

Pieters Visbedrijf NV

Second Defender

Fjord Seafood Chile SA

Third Defender

Procedural Posture

Commercial Action / Proof Before Answer (restricted to Merits)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defenders breached a contract by offering or supplying salmon products to Oscar Mayer during the agreed period
  2. 2 Whether the agreement covered tendering for future supply contracts
  3. 3 Whether smoked salmon fell within the scope of 'salmon products' under the agreement

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the agreement between the parties was limited to not offering or supplying salmon products to Oscar Mayer for a period of one year, expiring in August 2003. Tendering for supply contracts after the expiry did not constitute breach. Smoked salmon was not included in 'salmon products' under the agreement. The defenders' admitted breach for supply during July-August 2002 was actionable, but no breach occurred in relation to tendering or supply after the expiry date.

Court Disposition

Claim partially upheld

Orders

  • Defenders liable for breach in relation to supply of salmon products during July-August 2002
  • Defenders to pay compensation for admitted breach