James Scott & Sons, Ltd v. R. & N. Del Sel and Another [1922] ScotLR 446 (22 June 1922)

James Scott & Sons, Ltd v. R. & N. Del Sel and Another [1922] ScotLR 446 (22 June 1922)

The dispute as to whether the contract was frustrated by the government embargo is a dispute under the contract and falls within the scope of the arbitration clause. The arbitration clause is sufficiently broad to cover such disputes, and the arbiters have jurisdiction to determine the issue.

Citation
[1922] ScotLR 446
Parties
Pursuer: James Scott & Sons, Limited; Defender: R. & N. Del Sel; Defender: Thomas Agnew
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
22 June 1922
Procedural Posture
Civil / Appeal (reclaiming Motion) From Lord Ordinary to Inner House, Second Division
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; arbitration to proceed
Legal Topics
Frustration of Contract, Arbitration Clause, Force Majeure, Shipping Contracts, Government Embargo
Contract Law Arbitration Frustration of Contract Arbitration Clause Force Majeure Shipping Contracts Government Embargo

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 20 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

James Scott & Sons, Limited

Pursuer

R. & N. Del Sel

Defender

Thomas Agnew

Defender

Procedural Posture

Civil / Appeal (reclaiming Motion) From Lord Ordinary to Inner House, Second Division

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the dispute as to frustration of contract and non-delivery due to government embargo falls within the scope of the arbitration clause.
  2. 2 Whether the arbitration clause survives alleged frustration of the contract.

Ratio Decidendi

The dispute as to whether the contract was frustrated by the government embargo is a dispute under the contract and falls within the scope of the arbitration clause. The arbitration clause is sufficiently broad to cover such disputes, and the arbiters have jurisdiction to determine the issue.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; arbitration to proceed

Orders

  • Repel the first and second pleas-in-law for the pursuers
  • Find that the dispute as to delivery of the 1875 bales falls to be determined by arbitration