supervening impossibilityvis majorcasus fortuitousfixed term contracttermination
Tags
fixed term contractterminationsupervening impossibility
legislation
Statutes Cited
UNKNOWN
ai analysis
Case Summary
Key Issues
{"issue_text":"Whether the contract became incapable of performance due to a casus fortuitous event (no more tobacco to buy).","issue_type":"law","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"Termination based on lack of tobacco; contract drafted by appellant; tobacco season timing."}
{"issue_text":"Whether the arbitrator misdirected himself by dismissing the appellant's defence of supervening impossibility.","issue_type":"law","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"Appellant's grounds of appeal."}
This summary was generated by AI. Use Zalari to read the full judgment.
background
Facts of the Case
Background
The appellant engaged the respondent on a fixed term contract as a tobacco buyer from 4 March to 4 August 2015. The appellant terminated the contract on 7 June 2015, claiming there was no more tobacco to buy. The respondent referred the dispute to arbitration, and the arbitrator ordered payment for the unexpired period. The appellant appeals this decision.
Read the full judgment, get AI analysis, and find related cases