The law on repudiation has been given welcome clarification, as Siobhan Jones reports
The remedy of repudiation entitles an innocent party to a contract to treat itself as discharged from its obligations under the contract (and the contract as terminated) in circumstances where the defaulting party is in breach. To effect a repudiation and terminate the contract the innocent party must elect to “accept” the repudiatory breach. If the innocent party instead elects to affirm the contract, the contract will not be terminated and the obligations under it will continue.
Questions have abounded as to whether a repudiatory breach can be “cured” (thus depriving the innocent party of the remedy), the distinction between actual and anticipated breaches, and the date on which an assessment of breach is to be made. These questions were neatly dealt with by the Court of Appeal in Telford Homes (Creekside) Limited v Ampurius Nu Homes Holdings Limited [2013] EWCA Civ 577; [2013] All ER (D) 305 (May).
The law
One of the most important authorities in this area (a case heavily referenced in Ampurius) is Hong
